- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 41,359
- Liked Posts:
- 23,646
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
I wonder where they had Watson ranked.
Your posts are worse than your articles….That’s easy, especially in hindsight. Because no other relevant nfl scouting department valued those players like Poles, and Gordon and Brisker (who he was willing to overcook the board for the safety position) were at the top of his board, there was no way he was choosing a wr in the second.
The real question is whether the Bears rankings were the correct rankings and how the WRs picked after 39 contribute compared to the DBs the Bears picked. We shall see.“It’s disappointing the Bears didn’t rank a lower player higher because they play WR.” Not a direct quote, but it gets the just if it…
Even that’s not a good comparison. Did those other WRs fit what the Bears want to do one offense? Many had serious questions about that.The real question is whether the Bears rankings were the correct rankings and how the WRs picked after 39 contribute compared to the DBs the Bears picked. We shall see.
No, you always need to analyze your personnel decisions. If, for example, one of the receivers they passed on becomes an all-pro and the DBs are ok, but nothing special, they made a mistake.Even that’s not a good comparison. Did those other WRs fit what the Bears want to do one offense? Many had serious questions about that.
So the only thing that really matters is do Gordon and Brisker play well for the Bears?
Glad you aren’t the one in charge…No, you always need to analyze your personnel decisions. If, for example, one of the receivers they passed on becomes an all-pro and the DBs are ok, but nothing special, they made a mistake.
Nice way of creating bullshit to try to get away with a crappy take, but ...That’s easy, especially in hindsight. Because no other relevant nfl scouting department valued those players like Poles, and Gordon and Brisker (who he was willing to overcook the board for the safety position) were at the top of his board, there was no way he was choosing a wr in the second.
It is nice to know you knew the draft board of every other team. So, how do you know that the teams drafting at 40 to 50 did not have Gordon rated at 30? Say a team is drafting at 12, and passed on Gordon to choose somebody they had rated at 12. That does not mean they rated Gordon 40 or lower. Your logic is flawed.That’s easy, especially in hindsight. Because no other relevant nfl scouting department valued those players like Poles, and Gordon and Brisker (who he was willing to overcook the board for the safety position) were at the top of his board, there was no way he was choosing a wr in the second.
Well, the Bears rankings were correct in the minds of Poles and the gang. Of course, there could be some major flaws in how they scouted and ranked the players, but I guess that is why they make the big money and we don't.The real question is whether the Bears rankings were the correct rankings and how the WRs picked after 39 contribute compared to the DBs the Bears picked. We shall see.
I don't believe this is correct.No, you always need to analyze your personnel decisions. If, for example, one of the receivers they passed on becomes an all-pro and the DBs are ok, but nothing special, they made a mistake.
Surely you don't think it's best to pass on an all-pro for a mediocre player. Yes, I understand we don't know now. The question is: should we go back and look at the process and try to learn from our mistakes-or successes?Glad you aren’t the one in charge…
Your opinions are worse than his articles.Your posts are worse than your articles….
- Watson was never goodGlad you aren’t the one in charge…
I surely think your 2-3 year down the road hypotheticals are idiotic…Surely you don't think it's best to pass on an all-pro for a mediocre player. Yes, I understand we don't know now. The question is: should we go back and look at the process and try to learn from our mistakes-or successes?