NFL Supplemental Draft

[silverbear]

Sliver was trying to make the point that VA had just as tough a schedule as Ohio State and Nebraska.

Actually, that wasn't my point at all... my point was that you can't knock Brooks' stats because he allegedly played an inferior schedule, because playing in the ACC, he played in one of the toughest conferences in the nation... so, if he DID play a weaker schedule, it wasn't significantly weaker... last year, they had four different top 25 teams in the schedule, just from their conference alone...

Now, if you wish to prove your point, simply do some research, and show us the strength of schedules for all 3 teams, for each of the last 3 seasons... failing that, you have NOTHING to support your argument...

I said they didn't- and that the production by Burnett and Carpenter should be measured that way.

Which is, of course, a tacit admission that Brooks' college stats were as good as, or better than, Burnett's and Carpenter's...

 

[Muhast]

That linebacker David Dixon that Saladin mentioned went to my ju-co where i played at. I'd pick him up for sure if he goes undrafted. He would have been a star in d.1 also, just one of those guys that puts his all in football, and none in classes so he's always ineligible or borderline in school.

 

[silverbear]

Looking at the schedules for Tenn and Ohio State vs VA. I say they are tougher. For one the BIG 10 and SEC are tougher then the ACC.

Yes to the SEC, I think that's the toughest conference in the nation these last coupla years... the Big 10?? I don't know, that one's close...

But nobody has bothered to dispute that the ACC is one of the toughest football conferences in the nation... so if the Cavs did play a bit weaker schedule, it was only a LITTLE weaker... not enough to totally dismiss all the all-American awards Ahmad won, or the fact he was a finalist (one of three) for the Butkus Award as a sophomore...

Those CLEARLY show that when healthy, he was one of the best linebackers in the nation... Carpenter won some similar honors, but Burnett never came close... part of the reason for that is he was frequently hurt in college...

Do you disagree? VA played Duke, Syracuse,Temple and Western Michigan. ALso Vtech, Miami Fla and Florida State. 4 patsies and 3 toughies.Maryland, BC, North Carolina and Ga Tech. middle of the road teams. And Minnesotta. They were destroyed by V Tech.
Ohio State played Texas, Iowa, Michigan, , Penn State and Notre Dame. Now they did have 2 patsies - somewhat - in Miami Ohio and San Diego State-

That was last year... and Brooks wasn't on the field for 3 of those 4 patsies...

Oooops, you didn't know that, did you?? You also failed to take into account the schedule the previous 2 years... so you're carefully, and disingenuously, setting the parameters of your argument so narrowly as to "prove" your point...

 

[5Stars]

silverbear, has anyone told you that you talk too much!! If I did not know better, I would think that you were vaccinated with a phonograph needle!

 

[silverbear]

silverbear, has anyone told you that you talk too much!!

Yeah, but it mostly comes from folks who I've just made look stupid...

If you were paying attention, you'd know that I often make fun of my own long-windedness...

But hey, am I forcing you to read my posts??

 

[silverbear]

Y'know, I've been thinking about it, and I really, really enjoy the way burma argues... perhaps we should all emulate his "intellectual" approach:

1) Regale us with opinions like "the Cowboys don't need Ahmad Brooks, he wouldn't be an upgrade over what we already have"... but when challenged on that issue, don't EVER back up those weak opinions with anything even remotely resembling facts... instead, tell your opponent that HE should prove your argument for you, after that opponent HAS offered the stats to support his argument...

2) When it becomes apparent that your claims are much too broad, try to change the parameters of the argument; instead of discussing ALL the linebackers on the roster, limit it to one or two (Carpenter and Burnett)... and suggest that THEIR stats are somehow more compelling because they played a "tougher" schedule... never mind that those two were OUTSIDE linebackers coming out of college, while Brooks is a pure INSIDE linebacker, so those particular comparisons lack validity... and never mind that of the INSIDE linebackers that you claim are better than Ahmad, Ryan Fowler played in the same, allegedly "weak" conference, and Kai Parham was Brooks' TEAMMATE at UVa...

So, you made the claim, burma, now tell me how Brooks is NOT an upgrade over the likes of Ryan Fowler, Scott Shanle, Oliver Hoyte and Kai Parham... in particular, tell me how his stats can't be compared to Parham's who played on the SAME TEAM...

Bottom line, if Brooks was drafted by the Cowboys in the supplemental draft, he would be in competition with Bradie James, Kevin Burnett, Fowler, Shanle, Hoyte and Parham... the Boys will keep at least 4 ILBs, now try to convince me that there are 4 ILBs currently on the roster that are better than Ahmad... that WAS the claim you made (though of course, you never have done ANYTHING to back up that opinion)...

Seems you like to throw your BS opinions out there as fact, and expect us to accept them uncritically... which becomes even less likely when you can't even get the college that one of them attended right...

Unsupported opinions don't stand up to factual rebuttal, burma... if you can't bring facts to the table, you'd be well advised to run as fast as you can from this argument...

 

[burmafrd]

Silver- I admitted my mistake about Tenn vs Neb earlier- but you obviously chose to not see it. Not suprising- you have a very myopic version of reality.
I check this thread about 3 times a day- and every time it seems like you have added 3-5 posts. Man, you really need to get some help. You are now at the point with Brooks that Kartr is with Q. Well, almost. I put forward data on the FACT that VA had an easier schedule so Brooks stats are probably inflated. You ignored that- tried to claim it did not matter. NOW that is dumb. Brooks is a troublemaker- he is not that great- he is not all that much more if any then what we already had. We have enough troublemakers on this team now- TO and maybe Ellis- to add any more.
But keep on going with your song and dance. It is getting somewhat amusing.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

All we'll see then is if any teams are willing to look past his off-field problems... or don't you think that his off-field issues might work to drive down his draft value some...

Nope, we won't see anything at all in regard to each player's talents until we see them both play a year or two or three...

I think we'll know a little bit come July 16th, whether a team(s) thinks his talent will be enough to overcome the off-field issues, which you don't feel are big

 

[silverbear]

Silver- I admitted my mistake about Tenn vs Neb earlier- but you obviously chose to not see it.

I saw it... after I made that second post on the subject...

At least you're honest enough to admit that you made a mistake, and I'll give you credit for that... I could make a point at your expense here, but out of respect for your honesty, I'll forego that "pleasure"...

I check this thread about 3 times a day- and every time it seems like you have added 3-5 posts.

Posting on football boards is one of my favorite hobbies... you got a problem with that??

If there were a few more threads to interest me, or if there was something even remotely interesting going on on the other boards I frequent, I probably wouldn't be posting as much to this thread... only so many hours in a day, you know...

Man, you really need to get some help.

Ahhh, can't prevail on the facts, so you go for the "you need to get some help" card... wish I had a nickel for every time some poster I've taken to school tried to play that card on me...

Unfortunately for you, your opinion of me doesn't mean jack to me... I'm quite comfortable with who I am, and how I post, and don't plan on changing any time soon...

What, did you think you could use "psychology" on me, and convince me to walk away from this?? Sorry, hoss, but the only way out of this for you is to run away... so long as you remain in this argument, I'll be here to make your life miserable...

I put forward data on the FACT that VA had an easier schedule so Brooks stats are probably inflated.

You posted no "data" at all... just went back and reviewed the thread, and there's nothing of the sort on ANY topic that you've offered up...

Worse, you carefully tried to limit the argument to two linebackers who you know had played in tough conferences, and those two weren't even INSIDE linebackers in college... so you tried to compare apples to oranges (don't know why you left out Bradie James, who IS an inside backer, and who played on a national championship team at LSU)...

Your argument has been extremely dishonest right from the start, when you claimed that Brooks was no better than the linebackers we have now... that clearly means ALL the linebackers, and it was that assertion that got me arguing with you... so I put up Brooks' stats, and his all-America pedigree, and his being a finalist for the Butkus Award, and challenged you to tell me which of the Boys' linebackers had better pedigree coming out of college... you refused to do so, asking ME to make your case for you...

That lost you round one, so then you came up with this "weak schedule" crap... which is completely ASININE, when the Cavs play in a conference that includes perennial top 25 powerhouse teams like Miami, Florida State, Virginia Tech and Boston College... that is a very, very good conference these days, and if you don't know that, then you really don't know enough about college football to be participating in this argument...

But I think you DID know that, which is why you carefully picked out two linebackers who also played at powerhouse schools... never a word about Ryan Fowler, who as I've already noted played in the same conference that Brooks did; not even a mention of Kai Parham, who played on the same TEAM as Ahmad did (which would obviously completely blow your argument out of the water)... and those two ARE inside linebackers, they ARE the guys that Brooks would be competing against if the Boys brought him in... and they ARE two of the linebackers that you said at the outset were just as good as Ahmad...

But that didn't end your dishonesty, no sir-- when you got into the Cavs' "weaker" schedule, you carefully limited yourself to their out of conference schedule, which took the top 25 teams on their schedule out of the equation... you did that in a feeble attempt to make Virginia's schedule look weaker than it actually was... this is what you call "data", and as I've just shown, it was DISHONEST "data"...

What's really funny is that you didn't even know that Brooks was not on the field for three of the four weak sisters in their out of conference that you cited... so clearly, you can't say his stats are "inflated" because the Cavs played those teams, since he didn't HAVE stats in those games...

When you first made that claim, it might have been because you honestly didn't know that, but you know it now, because I told you, and you're STILL trying to make that argument... how very dishonest of you...

Apparently you think that you can define the parameters of the truth narrowly enough to make it APPEAR that you're "winning", but of course when you don't offer the WHOLE truth, all you're doing is lying...

So, all the respect I felt for you when you stood up and admitted you'd made a mistake goes up in smoke when you have to play the weasel in order to advance your argument... if I ever had to do something that contemptible to "win" an online argument, I'd walk away from the argument...

I'd also be rather ashamed of myself for my mendacity...

Brooks is a troublemaker-

Given that you don't know the whole story (you only know that he was dismissed from the team), that's nothing more than a BIASED opinion... and I have shown you reason to believe that the University doesn't consider him a troublemaker, but rather was bound by what they admit are unusually stringent rules in such things... indeed, this wasn't some overnight decision, the AD and the coach agonized for some time before kicking him off the team...

I mean, why would they let such a "troublemaker" conduct his workout on campus?? They had no obligation to do so, but they're tryin' to help the guy... ditto Al Groh's plan to attend the workout, to make himself available to scouts... he simply wouldn't do that if he planned to hurt Ahmad's stock with the coaches and scouts, because if word of that got out, it would KILL him on the recruiting trail... he'd be perceived as a coach who will throw his players under the bus when it suits his interests...

Obviously, the University of Virginia doesn't consider Ahmad Brooks to be a troublemaker, just a kid who messed up...

So, what it boils down to is you've already made your mind up about the kid, even without having any substantial facts to back your biased opinion up... and you're unwilling to even consider the possibility that you might be wrong, that there might be more there than you're seeing...

Which makes you a close-minded fool, bluntly... as the old bumper sticker says "my mind's made up, don't bother confusing me with a bunch of facts"... well, hoss, an intelligent man keeps his mind OPEN, and is willing to modify his opinions when he receives data that tells him he might be wrong...

But not ol' burma...

he is not that great-

Yeah, all-American linebackers who finish in the final 3 in the Butkus Award voting as a sophomore are a dime a dozen... and virtually every team has linebackers so fast that they can return kickoffs...

Every time you say that, you make yourself look more profoundly stupid... scouts are comparing the guy to Ray Lewis, for God's sake... I didn't make that comparison, it wouldn't have occurred to me simply because Ahmad is so much bigger than Ray is...

Argue that you think he's a troublemaker, if you must... argue that he's fat and out of shape, if you must... but to say he's not extremely talented, well, that's just IDIOTIC...

The only legitimate question is if he's talented enough for you to overlook his off-field issues... this is a question that I'm sure Bill Parcells will be asking his old buddy Al Groh (if he hasn't already)...

he is not all that much more if any then what we already had.

There you go, being a weasel again... that wasn't the song you were singing at first; you said he wasn't ANY more than what we already have... now, after bludgeoning you over the head with the stupidity of that assertion, after you've repeatedly had to try to change the parameters of the argument, you're trying to soften that position, adopt a more reasonable stance (more reasonable not because it's right, but because it's not quite so extreme)...

Too bad for you that you're full of it again... Brooks is considerably more talented than Hoyte, or Parham, or Fowler, or Shanle... he's probably as good as James or Ayodele... if he made the team and cost one of them a roster spot, the Cowboys would be a better team for it...

But keep on going with your song and dance. It is getting somewhat amusing.

Oh, you LIKE looking stupid?? In that case, I'm happy I could help...

I await your next round of lies and half-truths with eager anticipation...

 

[Vintage]

Bear, the question isn't is Brooks an upgrade over Parham, Hoyte, or Fowler.

He probably is.

The question is how much resources do we stick into another LBer.

1st rounders- Ware, Carpenter
2nd rounders- Burnett
3rd Rounders-
4th Rounders- James

Free Agency- Ayodele, Boiman, Singleton, Fowler, Parham, Hoyte

Its going to cost us a pick in rounds 1-4.

Is it worth that for a backup when we have presssing needs for starters elsewhere/eventual replacements at skill positions?

 

[silverbear]

I think we'll know a little bit come July 16th,

Actually, I believe the workout is scheduled for the 13th...

whether a team(s) thinks his talent will be enough to overcome the off-field issues, which you don't feel are big

Summer, I honestly don't know how big his off-field issues are... I have said that all along... please don't go distorting my arguments the way the burmaweasel has...

I mean, look, we KNOW that he took a drug conviction a couple-three years back (for weed again), was placed on probation, and eventually had his record cleared when he completed the probation with no further legal problems...

We KNOW that he missed some practices before the start of his sophomore year, while attending to some unspecified "personal problems"... we have no idea what those personal problems were, but we know that the coach and the school were on board with his dealing with those issues, so we can't just assume that it was more "trouble"...

And we KNOW that he was kicked off the team after he tested positive for THC again... but there have been published reports that he tested positive for trace amounts of THC, and his people claim that this happened as a result of second-hand smoke... obviously, we don't know if that's true or not, but if it really was just a trace amount in his system, it's entirely possible...

So, worst case scenario, we have a hard-core druggie on our hands... but the best case scenario is Brooks had one time that he ran afoul of the law for smokin' weed, and hasn't smoked since... those "personal problems" might have been something like a family illness, and this most recent failed drug test might have been something no more sinister than attending a party where dope was being smoked...

Anyway, those are the "issues" that Brooks has faced at the University of Virginia...

We know two other things that a thinking man would factor into the equation-- though the Cavs kicked him off the team, they're still allowing him to use their facilities to showcase his talents for NFL scouts and coaches... we also know that his old coach plans on attending that workout...

Both of those would lead a reasonable thinking man to the conclusion that the University doesn't really consider him such a "troublemaker"... these are clear signs that they're still trying to HELP him find gainful employment in the NFL... does it make sense to you that they'd go to that trouble for a troublemaker??

So you see, unlike those who have been so quick to dismiss him as a troublemaker not worth the Cowboys' attention, I have at least researched his history at UVa, I have a grasp of all the story that has been made available to the public... what I have learned leads me to doubt that he's the troublemaker that some haters on here wish us to think he is...

But for all that, I have also said all along that if Parcells talks to Groh, and doesn't like what he hears, then I wouldn't WANT the Boys to draft him... which means I'm keeping open the POSSIBILITY that he is indeed the troublemaker that others say he is...unlike those haters, I have an open mind...

I only got into this argument in the first place because it annoys me when posters get to trashing some player, and throw out all kinds of BS reasons for doing so... they say Brooks is fat, so he's not worth picking up, when of course he NEVER had a problem with making weight until he got HURT... that's contemptible...

They even try to tell us he isn't good, when the record is quite clear that he is very talented... and they go to all kinds of disingenuous lengths to "prove" that specious claim...

Somebody ought to defend the guy when he's being trashed for illegitimate reasons... Brooks isn't the first player I've done that for (I've been sticking up for Greg Ellis pretty vigorously in another thread, Drew Henson is another I've vigorously defended, and there are numerous other examples in the past)... he won't be the last, either...

And though I like you personally, if you've got a problem with that, it really is your problem, 'cause I don't give a rat's patootie... even if it makes me unpopular, I will always stand up for what I honestly believe... in fact, it HAS made me unpopular at times in the past; I pissed off a bunch of people over on the Ranch (back when it was still the SilverStar Digest) with my criticisms of Superstar Randal Williams... I mean, folks just got bent ALL out of shape, and I can assure you, nobody was steppin' up to take my side on that one...

Didn't matter to me, I stood my ground, and of course was ultimately proven right-- the guy really was the fastest stiff in the NFL...

I'd like to be liked and respected by the folks on these boards, but I won't pretend to be something I'm not to get there... the thing is, taking that approach has made me liked by a certain faction on every board I've frequented... and it has also made me pretty thoroughly despised by other factions... I've learned to accept that as a consequence of being the way I am, and I like to joke that it's the curse of a dynamic, forceful personality...

Except I'm not really joking when I say that; when you stand up firmly for what you think is right, when you speak your mind frankly, people react strongly... the only thing my foes as well as my friends can never say about me is that I don't shoot straight... I don't lie, simply because I don't care to "win" an argument if I have to lie...

I might be obnoxious, I might be a jerk, but I'm an HONEST obnoxious jerk...

 

[TNCowboy]

Bear, the question isn't is Brooks an upgrade over Parham, Hoyte, or Fowler.

He probably is.

The question is how much resources do we stick into another LBer.

1st rounders- Ware, Carpenter
2nd rounders- Burnett
3rd Rounders-
4th Rounders- James

Free Agency- Ayodele, Boiman, Singleton, Fowler, Parham, Hoyte

Its going to cost us a pick in rounds 1-4.

Is it worth that for a backup when we have presssing needs for starters elsewhere/eventual replacements at skill positions?

I'd have no problem with spending a high pick if he was the elite player he looked to be in 2004. Thing is, he's been in trouble at least twice for drugs, and there are rumors of other problems. Regardless, I'm sure Parcells will have the lowdown from Groh.

 

[silverbear]

Bear, the question isn't is Brooks an upgrade over Parham, Hoyte, or Fowler.

Actually, Vintage, that WAS the issue. that WAS the claim that burma made... he went to great lengths trying to defend that asinine position... I wouldn't be arguing something so obvious if he hadn't been that silly, I would have figured that most knowledgeable football fans would consider his talent a given...

[quote}The question is how much resources do we stick into another LBer.[/quote]

And THAT'S an eminently fair question... the thing is, you're the first one who's asked it in this thread...

My answer to it would be that's up to Bill and Jerry to decide... happily, they'll have some pretty good intelligence to make that call with, better intelligence than you or I will have... absent that intelligence, I can't make that call... happily, I have come to trust the team's personnel decisions, ever since Jeff Ireland became director of scouting, so I'll have no problem at all with whatever they decide...

Its going to cost us a pick in rounds 1-4.

I think you're right (I rather doubt that any team will go as high as a 1st or a 2nd, given his off-field problems, but I'm convinced he won't last longer than the 4th), and I've already said that even with a good review from Al Groh, I wouldn't go higher than a 4th round pick... if that's not enough to get the job done, so be it...

Part of the reason I wouldn't go higher than a 4th is the issue you just raised-- how much of the team's resources do you want to dedicate to the linebacking position... given that linebacking is EXTREMELY important in the 3-4, I'd be comfortable with going as high as a 4th...

Is it worth that for a backup when we have presssing needs for starters elsewhere/eventual replacements at skill positions?

If the Cowboys were to acquire Brooks, I expect that he'd be a starter pretty quick... perhaps not the first year, because he'll be getting with the program so late, but I truly believe that unless he gets suspended for drugs, he'll be starting for somebody by next year...

Now, to turn your question around on you, if Brooks gets a good review from Groh, and if he has the talent to start by year 2 for the Boys, would YOU put in a claim for him?? If so, how high would you go to acquire an eventual starting ILB??

How refreshing to discuss this subject reasonably... thanks for the contribution...

 

[silverbear]

I'd have no problem with spending a high pick if he was the elite player he looked to be in 2004. Thing is, he's been in trouble at least twice for drugs, and there are rumors of other problems. Regardless, I'm sure Parcells will have the lowdown from Groh.

Overall, a fair assessment, but for one little quibble-- the only other "rumors" this long-time UVa fan has heard about (and I have a number of websites dedicated to the Cavs bookmarked, that I visit regularly) consisted of him missing some practices before the start of his junior season for unspecified "personal problems"... but his coach and his school didn't have any problem with him taking that time off, they acted very much like it was no big deal... when he came back, there was no "punishment", he was still the starter...

I don't mean this to sound confrontational or antagonistic, but if you have any other rumors of this nature to share-- even if they are just rumors-- I really would be interested in hearing about them... they might paint a different picture of the guy... I won't promise to change my mind on him, but I will factor them into my thinking...

 

[silverbear]

Aw, DAYUM, my 4000th post was a stupid online argument... I would have much preferred it be something more substantial than that, LOL...

Ah well, too late for regrets... and given the way I love to argue, maybe it's appropriate that I reached that milestone in the course of an argument...

 

[Vintage]

Actually, Vintage, that WAS the issue. that WAS the claim that burma made... he went to great lengths trying to defend that asinine position... I wouldn't be arguing something so obvious if he hadn't been that silly, I would have figured that most knowledgeable football fans would consider his talent a given...

I should have made it clear; that its my question...

My answer to it would be that's up to Bill and Jerry to decide... happily, they'll have some pretty good intelligence to make that call with, better intelligence than you or I will have... absent that intelligence, I can't make that call... happily, I have come to trust the team's personnel decisions, ever since Jeff Ireland became director of scouting, so I'll have no problem at all with whatever they decide...

Agreed.

Part of the reason I wouldn't go higher than a 4th is the issue you just raised-- how much of the team's resources do you want to dedicate to the linebacking position... given that linebacking is EXTREMELY important in the 3-4, I'd be comfortable with going as high as a 4th...

Agreed as well. We spent a 4th on a PR this year. I'd have no problem giving up a 4th for a starting ILB (if he is going to start for us at some point). I wouldn't for a career backup.

If the Cowboys were to acquire Brooks, I expect that he'd be a starter pretty quick... perhaps not the first year, because he'll be getting with the program so late, but I truly believe that unless he gets suspended for drugs, he'll be starting for somebody by next year...

Which would work nicely; if we decided not to keep Bradie after this year. But the drug issue is something to be concerned about. Parcells probably has the inside scoop about it from Groh.

Now, to turn your question around on you, if Brooks gets a good review from Groh, and if he has the talent to start by year 2 for the Boys, would YOU put in a claim for him?? If so, how high would you go to acquire an eventual starting ILB??

Dunno. Depends on how he projects. If he projects to be a young Ray Lewis (in a 4-3) at ILB in a 3-4; I'd be more than willing to part with a day one pick.

If he projects as a Bradie James type; a 4th rounder at best (if he is to become the replacement for Bradie)

 

[silverbear]

Agreed as well. We spent a 4th on a PR this year. I'd have no problem giving up a 4th for a starting ILB (if he is going to start for us at some point). I wouldn't for a career backup.

I definitely think he has more potential than that...

Which would work nicely; if we decided not to keep Bradie after this year.

Has there been talk about not keeping him?? That would be a pretty questionable move, IMO... but of course, a 3-4 needs two ILBs, and Ayodele is a natural OLB trying to make the switch...

But the drug issue is something to be concerned about.

Yes sir, it absolutely is... it's something that needs to be investigated VERY carefully, and if the Boys don't like what they learn, they should stay far away from him...

Parcells probably has the inside scoop about it from Groh.

I'd bet my last dime (which is all I can afford, because it IS my last dime, LOL) that Bill and Al have already talked...

If he projects to be a young Ray Lewis (in a 4-3) at ILB in a 3-4; I'd be more than willing to part with a day one pick.

If he projects as a Bradie James type; a 4th rounder at best (if he is to become the replacement for Bradie)

Except that I'd like to see James and Brooks side by side some day, I can't find any fault in your thinking...

Sorry, bud, but I just don't think we're gonna be able to get a good argument goin' on this one... you'll have to stop being so reasonable first...

 

[Vintage]

The only reason I keep saying "replacing James" is bec. James is a FA at the end of the year...

And Ayodele got sizable contract.

If it came down to keeping one or the other (in favor of Brooks); then Bradie would be let go IMO.

 

[burmafrd]

I really would not want to let go of James if he continues to improve.

 

[burmafrd]

Does anyone have a breakdown of Brooks numbers vs what game and against who he got them- I cannot find much.