Am I the only one underwhelmed by our draft?

[Bob Sacamano]

Laymen.

seriously

and ice, all I can make out from you is "blah blah blah WAHHH WAAAH *sniff* *sniff* blah blah blah"

 

[iceberg]

It's ok for them to tell you you're wrong and it's ok for you to tell them the same- that's not the same as anyone begrudging your right to a differing opinion, which IMO noone does.

when you tell me my opinion is "wrong" you're being a "kid".

great. be a kid. but by defination an opinion is neither right or wrong - to make it that way is just to look for a fight.

 

[iceberg]

I checked the site....

This is 'off topic' but.....I take back what I said about the 'almost nekkid women.'

If I weren't married, I'd be tryin' to come to your parties!

You may now return to your regularly scheduled debate.:

pool party tomorrow. she'll be there w/friends. i'll be over when i wake up later. just got back from HIM and having a great time flinging young kids into the crowd in the pit. : )

but jennifer is something special - i'm just glad she calls me a friend in public. : )

 

[iceberg]

It's all about the "names".

Gilles dropped from a possible one/definite two until the second day. That is a possible "solution"? How about the sure fire top twenty Justice?

And the free agents? I have heard two little peeps about Hutchinson and Bentley. We had to cut Allen for financial reasons to give us breathing room, yet we were going to mortgage the Valley Ranch complex to get either (both of whom showed ZERO interest in becoming Cowboys to begin with)? As for Kosier, we signed him immediately. This wasn't like standing around for weeks and signing Marcellus Wiley. That was worthy of complaining about. Again, there are clear signs we did our homework.

Sadly, some posters don't even know the subject matter to begin with and that's part of the problem. They can tell you the "names" though. Laymen.

oh yea - *I'M* condecending.... : )

 

[Eddie]

lol the RANCH HEADS are always right!!! I bet 90% of the teams have not signed 2 starting OG in the last 2 offseasons... that tells me they cant draft OLmen!!!!


they say that NO OL in the draft was worth Drafting (your words)... while only 10 OL go undrafted! well some was worthy of being drafted!

they havent drafted an above average OL in 8 years... that tells me they cant draft OL!



oh well maybe I'm wrong... 8 years is not an indication of the BOYS not drafting OL well!!!!

I have to agree. Something is wrong on the OL front. LA and Flo were the last two starting quality OLmen we picked up. The rest boggle my mind.

Soloman Page ... could have been a monster at RT, but never panned out.

Andre Gurode ... still sneaking by, but not worth his draft status.

Rogers ... unfortunate, but the scouts told BP not to take him.

Peterman ... one trick pony.

I'm not blasting the scouts, but we've done an awful job along the OL these past few years. That's why we had to shell out so much money in FA to reinforce it.

So far, only 2 starters along the OL will have been drafted by us. Fabini, Rivera, and Kosier are all outsiders who took the money cause we haven't been able to close the loop along the OL.

 

[zrinkill]

Man ...... the Negative zombies are out in force.

must be angry because they finally had to see T.O. in uniform.

 

[burmafrd]

We have had some not so good O Line picks. BUT the jury is still out despite what pessimists like Eddie want us to believe on Gurode, Johnson and Peterman. THough Gurode is on his last chance. If you look around the league you will not find that many teams that have done all that well DRAFTING O linemen - some do- but most do not.

 

[burmafrd]

Here is a thought for the pessimists: If Petitti does start, and Johnson keeps his job, and peterman comes through- then guess what: FOUR of FIVE STARTERS are our OWN DRAFT choices. And if Gurode sticks as well that means one of the top reserves is a draft choice as well.

 

[iceberg]

Man ...... the Negative zombies are out in force.

must be angry because they finally had to see T.O. in uniform.

thanks to photoshoppers, we've already seen it. : )

 

[Alexander]

oh yea - *I'M* condecending.... : )

I don't deny it though.

 

[DLCassidy]

when you tell me my opinion is "wrong" you're being a "kid".

great. be a kid. but by defination an opinion is neither right or wrong - to make it that way is just to look for a fight.

In my opinion the sky is green.:laugh1:

 

[superpunk]

So far, only 2 starters along the OL will have been drafted by us. Fabini, Rivera, and Kosier are all outsiders who took the money cause we haven't been able to close the loop along the OL.

Kosier and Fabini are not the "starters" yet. They've still got to earn it.

 

[iceberg]

In my opinion the sky is green.:laugh1:

so i can either rant and rave cause you're WRONG!!!! *or* i could ask if you're color blind, in a part of the world where the northern lights could make it green, or other aspects that would make it true *to you* - NOT just blast you cause it's not green to me.

huge difference you get in time. : )

 

[p1_]

Going into minicamp I realize that I am just not as excited as I have been in previous years about our rookies.

Sorry, but I just wanted to know if I'm alone here.



Skyler Green is about the only pick I really like and he's probably nothing more than STer.
Carpenter was a good pick but I don't know about the first round price.

I just feel like we passed on opportunities to really bolster the O-Line and Offense.

If you want to pursue this line of thought, you should at least present your suggestions as to whom we should have taken at each draft position, round and selection. Otherwise, this is pointless.

 

[AsthmaField]

In my opinion the sky is green.:laugh1:

I thought that this made a very good and succinct point. Opinion can definately be wrong. It just isn't usually as clearly wrong as this example.

However, I thought this response was equally good:

so i can either rant and rave cause you're WRONG!!!! *or* i could ask if you're color blind, in a part of the world where the northern lights could make it green, or other aspects that would make it true *to you* - NOT just blast you cause it's not green to me.

huge difference you get in time. : )

That's a very good point ice. People could look a little more deeply into why someone thinks the way they do and try to get an idea of why they may be thinking completely different from them in the first place.

However, on a football message board, you'd probably be looking for a needle in a haystack if you tried to find that kind of forethought and compassion. You just won't hardly ever see that.

Truth is, when someone says something that other's think is incorrect... the crowd usually just says you're full of BS or an idiot.

Ice, I can tell by reading your stuff for a while now, that you like to go against conventional thinking (conventional being typical fanboy homerism). That's all well and fine, but you should be prepared for an onslaught of criticism and people calling you a negative nelly... and I think you are ready for that... or at least not surprised.

It should come as no surprise that a lot of Cowboy fans (myself included) will get on you for your negative posts.

The thing is... if everyone in this forum was saying that the O-Line sucked and that we weren't going to be able to win 5 games because of it... I think you would be sitting here telling us that it isn't that bad. I think you'd be telling us some of the positives regarding the O-Line, and again, going against conventional thinking. I think you like to play Devil's advocate and you like to provide the balance to the conversations that take place here.

IOW, if everyone here was saying the sky is blue... you'd be the one telling us that it isn't blue to color blind people and that in the arctic circle, the sky is a different color, at times. If everyone said it's green, you tell them that 99% of the time, the sky is blue.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

[ghst187]

If you look around the league you will not find that many teams that have done all that well DRAFTING O linemen - some do- but most do not.

that's true, heck Oakland used a top 4 pick on Gallery and he has struggled. And he was thought to be can't miss perennial probowler.
Packers once took Marinovich at #2....:laugh1:
OL drafting is as much a crapshoot as any other position.
That's a reason why I like drafting OL from schools known for putting out solid OL products year in and year out....U of Mich, Ohio St, etc.

 

[big dog cowboy]

So far, only 2 starters along the OL will have been drafted by us. Fabini, Rivera, and Kosier are all outsiders who took the money cause we haven't been able to close the loop along the OL.

Petitti starts in Jacksonville week one.

 

[iceberg]

I thought that this made a very good and succinct point. Opinion can definately be wrong. It just isn't usually as clearly wrong as this example.

However, I thought this response was equally good:

That's a very good point ice. People could look a little more deeply into why someone thinks the way they do and try to get an idea of why they may be thinking completely different from them in the first place.

However, on a football message board, you'd probably be looking for a needle in a haystack if you tried to find that kind of forethought and compassion. You just won't hardly ever see that.

Truth is, when someone says something that other's think is incorrect... the crowd usually just says you're full of BS or an idiot.

Ice, I can tell by reading your stuff for a while now, that you like to go against conventional thinking (conventional being typical fanboy homerism). That's all well and fine, but you should be prepared for an onslaught of criticism and people calling you a negative nelly... and I think you are ready for that... or at least not surprised.

It should come as no surprise that a lot of Cowboy fans (myself included) will get on you for your negative posts.

The thing is... if everyone in this forum was saying that the O-Line sucked and that we weren't going to be able to win 5 games because of it... I think you would be sitting here telling us that it isn't that bad. I think you'd be telling us some of the positives regarding the O-Line, and again, going against conventional thinking. I think you like to play Devil's advocate and you like to provide the balance to the conversations that take place here.

IOW, if everyone here was saying the sky is blue... you'd be the one telling us that it isn't blue to color blind people and that in the arctic circle, the sky is a different color, at times. If everyone said it's green, you tell them that 99% of the time, the sky is blue.

Just my opinion, of course.

so you're WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!! : )

i fully agree there are things that can be construed as right or wrong - such as the color of the sky references. but again if you're not *trying* to see a "rainbow through another persons eyes" then all you're going to see it is your own way. do i agree people argue first, "seek to understand" 2nd - oh hell yea. it's common and i'm used to it.

it just seems when i then try to explain my reasoning, or say i"m "color blind" - people will have *not* and my opinions are WRONG. summer and burm love to be right all the time when people disagree.

a few like LSpain, superpunk, dooms and some others actually take the time to talk about it - find the "common ground" and that's what i like to do. unfortunately sometimes i do get caught up in a hamster rodeo like the other day.

there is *no* right or wrong in how we feel this team *should* advance. while true we're just "fans" and certainly don't know as much as bill parcells, bp is NOT infalliable, so that means his picks may or may *NOT* pan out. saying i don't think a pick will pan out results far too often in "in bill i trust".

great. you do that. and when he's proven wrong in that area, why is the trust still there? if people don't wanna get into those discussions cause there is hardly ever a "winner" in those talks, yet people claim victory all the time any way.

like heavy hitter. he never "loses".

anyway - good post. thanks!

 

[MONT17]

fans of the Packers (Marinovich was a USC QB drafted by the Raiders) and Oakland are not talking about PLAYOFFS let alone SUPER BOWL! Bad teams have bad OLs so to say there are a bunch of teams with OL problems and that is an excuse for the BOYS OLs problems is funny and in a way sad!

I guess if your Kids friends bring home a D paper its okay for your Kid to bring home an F!

Most of us read other teams boards and conventional wisdom of the combined boards I have seen is that the COWBOYs have a weak OL full of ifs! every player must play better... every player, for this line to be average!


Now I know we have some young guys on the OL but most of them are on their "last chance" and have been nothing but problems since day 1... so with no track record for the current prospects and no STUD players developed in 8 or 9 years it begs the question... is there something wrong?

I like Petetti and he may be a find...but guys like Rogers, Peterman and Bates have never even come close to PLAYING!!!


I just think they cant scout OL... I guess since I beleive that I should be happy they do not daft OLINE!!! when your scouting dept. lets u draft PETERMAN over MATT SCHAUB there is a problem!



oh and what is BILL doing that gets his rookie OL hurt every year? this is starting to become second nature!!!

 

[burmafrd]

I almost ignored this last load of BS from Mont but I am bored so...

Does this guy know ANYTHING about football?