Bill Parcells on Mike & Mike... Cancelled

[FuzzyLumpkins]

dude, you're the one having problems w/ simple concepts, you can't differentiate between better and more important, and are tying to wax intellectual to save face

it's not good to build something up that you don't understand, just stick w/ simple concepts, understand them, then work your way up, baby steps, man, baby steps



yet you didn't say that, I'm not a mind-reader



you left that to interpretation because you were so vague



that DE in his 3-4 was the greater need, because w/o the 3-down lineman in his scheme, the LBs won't be as effective? that's the basic 2-gap, 3-4 philosophy, pal



so mentioning someone's potential to a HOFamer means he thinks the prototypical 3-4 DE, that doesn't impact a game as much as a HOFamer, is the better player?



and Ware's measurables were better than Spears', his potential was greater



I already did, and it's readily apparent that you are

You simply cannot keep up so I am going to make two points and leave it at that. Unfortunately they are me once again repeating myself on things you just dont grasp much less acknowledge.

1) You obvioulsy don't understand what better means or implies. You set your arbitrary standard, in this case talent or importance and try to force it into the situation. Why Parcells thinks he was better was irrelavant.

Could it have been based on talent or importance? Sure it could have been but it also could have beenbecaues Parcells likes big men from Louisianna.

The mistake that i made was allowing you to dictate what i meant. its like they say, "Don't argue with a fool; they will take you down to their level and beat you with experience." At the end of the day, the why of him thinking Spears was better just doesn't matter. He just did.

The salient issue is that Parcells would have made the mistake of drafting Spears first had it been left up to him. All the rest of this nonsense is stupidity from you that i allowed to go on distracting from my point.

2) On this one I am not sure if its your lack of cognitive ability or you just ignoring things so you can repeat yourself but Im going to guess the former.

As I stated before it is necessary for you to boil down the argument to LT HoF vs. prototype for you to understand. Unfortunately for you its not that simple. Of course if Parcells thought he had LT then its a no brainer. Parcells thought that Spears was a proven guy at the poistion that was the prototype for his position versus a guy that was unproven who had a ton of potential.

Obviously Parcells thought that the proven guy was the better player over potential.

Its like saying who is better Anthony Henry or Orlando Scandrick. According to you Scandrick is because he has more potential. Just look at his measurables he ran a 4.3. Its not that simple and I am sorry that is for you to understand.

anyway go ahead and repeat yourself again and ignore the above cause you don't understand. I am tired of having to lower myself to your level.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Im sorry but you really are stupid. You simply cannot keep up so I am going to make two points and leave it at that. Unfortunately they are me once again repeating myself on things you just dont grasp much less acknowledge.

1) You obvioulsy don't understand what better means or implies.

in this situation, it can only mean 2 things, better pick, or better player

I'm not here to wax intellectually on what better means in the grand scheme of things since it's meaning only serves 2 purposes in this discussion, the 2 above

You set your arbitrary standard, in this case talent or importance and try to force it into the situation. Why Parcells thinks he was better was irrelavant.

how is it irrelevent? we are talking about his ability to judge talent through the draft, are we not? and I didn't arbitrarily pick these things out of the clear, blue sky

Could it have been based on talent or importance? Sure it could have been but it also could have beenbecaues Parcells likes big men from Louisianna.

well it's not, and I already gave you the reasons for what it was that made him come to that decision

The mistake that i made was allowing you to dictate what i meant. its like they say, "Don't argue with a fool; they will take you down to their level and beat you with experience."

:laugh2: dude, I interpreted what you said, be clearer next time

At the end of the day, the why of him thinking Spears was better just doesn't matter. He just did.

it matters a great deal if we are talking about his abilities as a talent evaluator in the draft, we must go into his thinking

it's not like the guy threw ****ing darts against the wall and came to a conclusion

and it's Spears being the better pick, I can't believe you are either refusing to, or just can't, draw the distinction between better pick and player, STILL

The salient issue is that Parcells would have made the mistake of drafting Spears first had it been left up to him. All the rest of this nonsense is stupidity from you that i allowed to go on distracting from my point.

the "stupidity" coming from me is facts as to why Parcells wanted to take Spears over Ware

2) On this one I am not sure if its your lack of cognitive ability or you just ignoring things so you can repeat yourself but Im going to guess the former.

this coming from the guy who can't express himself clear enough to be understood and is spinning like the rinse cycle

As I stated before it is necessary for you to boil down the argument to LT HoF vs. prototype for you to understand. Unfortunately for you its not that simple. Of course if Parcells thought he had LT then its a no brainer. Parcells thought that Spears was a proven guy at the poistion that was the prototype for his position versus a guy that was unproven who had a ton of potential.

Obviously Parcells thought that the proven guy was the better player over potential.

no, no, no, for the upteenth time

Spears' position was critical to the success of Parcells' 3-4, along w/ the other 2, down linemen

Its like saying who is better Anthony Henry or Orlando Scandrick. According to you Scandrick is because he has more potential. Just look at his measurables he ran a 4.3. Its not that simple and I am sorry that is for you to understand.

this makes no sense, since both players are corners, so it doesn't relate here, it's just a bunch of nothingness

Spears over Ware was about who's position was more important to the success of his D

anyway go ahead and repeat yourself again and ignore the above cause you don't understand. I am tired of having to lower myself to your level.

lame


underscore: take some time to figure out how Parcells' 2-gap, 3-4 works, that's key in this discussion, and goes a long way into figuring out his mindset on that day, I can't fault a guy for using sound logic towards figuring out who to pick

would I be pissed because we missed out on Ware? when competent 3-4 DEs can be found in any draft? hell yeah, but I wouldn't foolishly believe that Parcells took Spears over Ware based on talent

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Here is Archer on what Parcells thought about Spears:

. Parcells saw Spears as the prototype 3-4 defensive end and liked his production at LSU.

http://chriscanty99.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=83&Itemid=32

And again i never said anything about talent evaluation you dolt. I was talking about how Parcells drafts.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Here is Archer on what Parcells thought about Spears:



http://chriscanty99.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=83&Itemid=32

And again i never said anything about talent evaluation you dolt. I was talking about how Parcells drafts.

really? show me anywhere where you said that Parcells drafted on need?

BEFORE I explained to you that that was the case w/ Parcells wanting Spears over Ware

and you didn't say much of anything, all you said was he thought Spears was better

better what? talent? player? player based on need?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

really? show me anywhere where you said that Parcells drafted on need?

BEFORE I explained to you that that was the case

shoot, you've already tried to tell me why Parcells thought Spears was the better talent, a few posts before, can you even keep your argument straight? w/o switching it every, other post?

I never said anything either way you dolt and Im not so stupid that I have to pigeonhole something into some asinine dualistic paradigm.

And I just said Parcells thought he was the more proven player because he was. You keep coming up with stupid strawmen because your trying to to reduce me down to your smallminded interpretation.

I could care less why he would have picked Spears first. I never commented on that. You did.

but heres an idea how about you substantiate your claim that it was not based on need or anything. You keep telling me youre going tot ell me how it is when at the en dof the day youre just a waiter who lives in Baltimore. you have no inside knowledge. How about you substantiate your red herring or just shut up with it

 

[Bob Sacamano]

And I just said Parcells thought he was the more proven player because he was.

JUST NOW lol

I love how you try to improve your argument as you go along, be concise and say that in the BEGINNING

I could care less why he would have picked Spears first. I never commented on that. You did.

because you said Parcells chose Spears over where w/ a stupid and vague claim that he thought he was better

but heres an idea how about you substantiate your claim that it was not based on need or anything.

I've been saying the decision was based on need

You keep telling me youre going tot ell me how it is when at the en dof the day youre just a waiter who lives in Baltimore. you have no inside knowledge. How about you substantiate your red herring or just shut up with it

in Parcells' 2-gap, 3-4, the 3 down linemen are supposed to occupy the blockers so that the LBs can make plays, heading into the '05 offseason he didn't have anybody, so he signed Jason Ferguson as a FA, and thought he needed to take Spears in the draft

enough substantiation for you? it sure beats "Parcells wanted to take SPears over Ware, so he thought he was better"

btw, I don't wait tables anymore and what gave you the idea that I live in Baltimore? just talking out of your arse per usual, I suppose

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

JUST NOW lol

I love how you try to improve your argument as you go along, be concise and say that in the BEGINNING



because you said Parcells chose Spears over where w/ a stupid and vague claim that he thought he was better



I've been saying the decision was based on need



in Parcells' 2-gap, 3-4, the 3 down linemen are supposed to occupy the blockers so that the LBs can make plays, heading into the '05 offseason he didn't have anybody, so he signed Jason Ferguson as a FA, and thought he needed to take Spears in the draft

enough substantiation for you? it sure beats "Parcells wanted to take SPears over Ware, so he thought he was better", and then changing your argument because mine was sorely beating yours'

btw, I don't wait tables anymore and what gave you the idea that I live in Baltimore? just talking out of your arse per usual, I suppose

I am waiting for any substantiation summer. the word of a waiter is meaningless. how about a quote from Parcells or some other ranch insider.

I never changed my arguement either. you inserted this entire talent versus need stupidity and then tried to pin me on something. im not being pinned because it doesnt matter to what my argument has been. So summer whats my argument?

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I am waiting for any substantiation summer. the word of a waiter is meaningless. how about a quote from Parcells or some other ranch insider.

you don't need a ranch insider to know that w/o a good Dline, a 2-gap, 3-4 is sunk

just some freakin' common sense, I mean, why else would he want to pass on someone who reminds him of a HOFamer and w/ greater potential?

I could be a homeless junkie, and my argument still looks much better than yours'

I never changed my arguement either. you inserted this entire talent versus need stupidity and then tried to pin me on something. im not being pinned because it doesnt matter to what my argument has been. So summer whats my argument?

if Parcells had his way, Spears would have been taken over Ware, as you so eloquently put it, "because he thought he was better", then it was, "he was more important", now it's, "because he thought he was the more proven player"

yeah, your argument didn't change...

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

you don't need a ranch insider to know that w/o a good Dline, a 2-gap, 3-4 is sunk

just some freakin' common sense, I mean, why else would he want to pass on someone who reminds him of a HOFamer and w/ greater potential?

I could be a homeless junkie, and my argument still looks much better than yours'



if Parcells had his way, Spears would have been taken over Ware, as you so eloquently put it, "because he thought he was better", then it was, "he was more important", now it's, "because he thought he was the more proven player"

yeah, your argument didn't change...

Find me the quote on what Parcells actually said, dolt. Substantiate. he said he COULD BLOSSOM into a Lawrence Taylor or Willie McGinest type. That was it. Youre stretching mighty far there bucko.

And a 3-4 is also sunk without competent edge rushers but again that is neither here nor there. I am going to once again attempt to swing away from your strawman back to my original point:

Was Parcells the primary factor in the Jacob Rogers pick? Was that a good pick?

Was Parcells the primary factor behind Al Johnson being picked? Was that a good pick?

Was Parcells the primary factor behind Zuriel Smith and Skyler Green? Were they good picks?

Was Parcells the primary factor behind the Fasano pick? Was that a good pick?

Would Parcells idea to pick Ernie Sims over Terrence Newman have been a good pick?

Would Parcells idea to pick Spears first over Ware been a good one?

These are my points from the very beginning. The why is irrelevant. just becasue you think he wanted Spears as a reach for a need is irrelevant. if anything that makes it worse.

Quit with your stupid strawman already.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Find me the quote on what Parcells actually said, dolt. Substantiate. he said he COULD BLOSSOM into a Lawrence Taylor or Willie McGinest type. That was it. Youre stretching mighty far there bucko.

lol, you find it, because he said that Ware reminded him of a certain #56, the day of the draft

And a 3-4 is also sunk without competent edge rushers but again that is neither here nor there.

in a 2-gap, 3-4, the 3-down linemen occupy the blockers so that the LBs can make plays, in that scheme, the down linemen are more important than the edge rushers, not so in Wade's, 1-gap, 3-4, though

Was Parcells the primary factor in the Jacob Rogers pick? Was that a good pick?

Was Parcells the primary factor behind Al Johnson being picked? Was that a good pick?

Was Parcells the primary factor behind Zuriel Smith and Skyler Green? Were they good picks?

Was Parcells the primary factor behind the Fasano pick? Was that a good pick?

Would Parcells idea to pick Ernie Sims over Terrence Newman have been a good pick?

Would Parcells idea to pick Spears first over Ware been a good one?

These are my points from the very beginning. The why is irrelevant. just becasue you think he wanted Spears as a reach for a need is irrelevant. if anything that makes it worse.

Quit with your stupid strawman already.

Ernie Sims wasn't in the same draft as Terrence Newman, you're thinking of DeWayne Robertson, yes, they were all bad picks, ok'd by Jerry Jones

 

[Chocolate Lab]

So wait... Parcells would've taken Spears, but you think he thought Ware was a better player?

Why would he (or anyone) do that?

 

[adamknite]

So wait... Parcells would've taken Spears, but you think he thought Ware was a better player?

Why would he (or anyone) do that?

Why did the Trailblazer's pass on Michael Jordan?

Trying to draft for need.

Of course, this is just saying "why" somebody would do that. I'm not saying Parcells really thought that way.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25636&highlight=DeMarcus+Ware+Lawrence+Taylor

Demarcus Ware has a lot to live up to.

An hour after he was the Cowboys' first pick, his new coach, Bill Parcells had compared him to Lawrence Taylor and Willie McGinest. Later, owner and general manager Jerry Jones mentioned Charles Haley's name a few times.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Why did the Trailblazer's pass on Michael Jordan?

Trying to draft for need.

And that was incredibly stupid, right?

(The truth is that if they'd accurately assessed each player's ability, they'd have taken Jordan even if they already had Clyde.)

 

[Bob Sacamano]

So wait... Parcells would've taken Spears, but you think he thought Ware was a better player?

Why would he (or anyone) do that?

*sigh* again, Parcells, 2-gap, 3-4 requires a good group of down-linemen to protect the LBs, so that they can make plays

in a word, need

 

[Chocolate Lab]

*sigh* again, Parcells, 2-gap, 3-4 requires a good group of down-linemen to protect the LBs, so that they can make plays

in a word, need

So just because of that, he took a player he knew was inferior? That doesn't make any sense.

 

[adamknite]

And that was incredibly stupid, right?

(The truth is that if they'd accurately assessed each player's ability, they'd have taken Jordan even if they already had Clyde.)

A lot of the time, yes it is my good sir.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

lol, you find it, because he said that Ware reminded him of a certain #56, the day of the draft



in a 2-gap, 3-4, the 3-down linemen occupy the blockers so that the LBs can make plays, in that scheme, the down linemen are more important than the edge rushers, not so in Wade's, 1-gap, 3-4, though



Ernie Sims wasn't in the same draft as Terrence Newman, you're thinking of DeWayne Robertson, yes, they were all bad picks, ok'd by Jerry Jones

its not up to me to prove that he said what you claim. You cant do it and thats all I need to know. He also compared him to Willie McGinest.

he never said Ware = Taylor.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

So just because of that, he took a player he knew was inferior? That doesn't make any sense.

if you understand Parcells' 3-4

it makes alot of sense

 

[superpunk]

The whole "Parcells wanted Spears over Ware" is just unsubstantiated hogwash anyway.

I have no idea why there is such a long discussion about it. We were eyeing both players - three if you include Merriman. We took Ware. The end.