Clearly you aren't reading all of my posts otherwise you would have never even asked this.
Person "I was repeating" happens to be in the Rams draft room - which is someone I'll give way more credence too vs someone on this board. Of course I'm going to go with the opinion of a Front office member over a speculator.
Lol so you take one of the few players that are exceptions to the rule and pass it off like the 'norm?
Hey, let's just only sign UDFA Qb's that were prior grocery store clerks - i mean cause you never know right?
To Patterson - you're twisting my words. I never said he was a bad pick or bad receiver - I'm just not blowing him up in the manner that you are based off a rookie year. Yea he's good play maker - but did he show the same skills as a receiver like a Keenan Allen? Hell no.... and I never gave an opinion on Jeffrey - not sure where why you guys are reaching for that.
We have a play maker with better route running skills in Tavon - now get him an actual receiver that an attract attention on the outside and we're set.
I don't care if we go after a guard/tackle toward the end of the 1st or even the later rounds (Which is where you predominantly find interior lineman) - I'm not just set for it at the top of the draft with better prospects (like watkins) available...especially since we have an LT and we're severely lacking a #1 WR, it's not the other way around.
I have no idea why you are being so dense and obtuse on the Jeffery Combine weight point?
You said Demoff said he "showed up" 30-40 lbs. overweight. Showed up where? The Combine? I've mentioned this, and you didn't correct it, so I assume that is what you meant Demoff meant.
I did read your posts (not every post you have had in your history on the board, but in the thread). His weight is a matter of public record, that you can reference yourself. He was actually 213 lbs. at his Pro Day, 216 lbs. at the earlier Combine. It doesn't HAVE to be a matter of "giving way more credence to" a front office member vs. a mssg board poster. or taking their word as the Gospel truth and automatically disbelieving a "speculator" about. Just look it up. Since you refuse to, here ya go. Three different sources. Find a dozen. Find a hundred. It will be the same answer. Unless you think this is a secret Illuminati, Free Mason internet conspiracy to keep the front office member and you in the dark, than he is wrong, and you are for regurgitating back nonsense. It doesn't matter if the Pope or Obama said it, they are wrong. You can also use logic and reason to piece this together, especially when it is spelled out to you numerous times, that he LOST 15-20 lbs., didn't GAIN 30-40 lbs. To gain 40 lbs. to get to 216 lbs., he would have had to start at 176 lbs. That is about what Tavon Austin weighs, and he is close to a half foot shorter. He reportedly weighed around 230-235 lbs. as a junior. That is about 60 lbs. apart??? Or if you go in the other direction, add 40 lbs. to his listed Combine weight that yields 256 lbs. If you add 40 lbs. to 230-235 lbs. (his reported junior season weight), that would make 270-275 lbs. Was Jeffery ever 255 lbs or 275 lbs. at the Combine? If Demoff says the Earth is flat, or the moon landing didn't happen, or NORAD is actually a secret facility where the Loch Ness monster, Big Foot, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, tooth fairy, Elvis, JFK and Jimmy Hoffa make magical lollipops, jelly beans and rainbows, and it is scientifically proven and documented that they are the source of these things... he would be wrong, and so would anybody who repeats him.
http://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?f=Alshon&l=Jeffery&i=9781
http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=89640&draftyear=2012&genpos=WR
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...results-alshon-jeffery-and-more-early-winners
You have a predictable, mechanistic, reflexive debate technique of answering questions with questions, refusing to anwer questions, changing the subject or distorting the original question to an unrecognizable straw man charicature and clumsy, ham handed, ill conceived parody of the original position. I asked if Ogden was a good move. I didn't say it was the norm. We can address that later. Or don't answer it, but don't misrepresent my position by saying I implied it was "the norm", that is a separate discussion. Obviously, anything having to do with a Hall of Famer likely won't fall into the "norm", we knew that already.
Perhaps you have a reading comprehension issue. This is the passage you were quoting from.
"On other matters, like was Patterson a good pick or not, that is more a matter of interpretation. Neither of us could really be "mistaken" in this case, we are speaking to our own subjective taste. You wanted a better route runner than Patterson for a late first pick, despite him having 9 TDs in just five starts. If he had started the whole season like Hopkins, he probably has 10-12 TDs. Again, what would it have taken to get your attention and concede he could be a future star. 15 TDs? 20 TDs? Randy Moss has the rookie record with 17."
Did I say you said he was a bad WR, I said you questioned his routes. Is that not your position, as well as you would not have picked him (see below)?
"I'm not saying he sucks or he's garbage - but for what he does as a first round receiver for the position he's supposed to fill, I'd want more of a route runner.."
So now you are twisting my words saying I twisted yours. That is meta-twisted dude, you are wrong, that is like an Escher landscape illustrating a Borges story.
You keep saying I'm blowing Patterson up. Yet you keep dodging the question. He had NINE TDs in five starts. If he starts 16, he probably gets 10-12 TDs. HOW MANY TDs WOULD IT TAKE TO OVERLOOK ROUTE CONCERNS? TWENTY TDs? THIRTY TDS? MORE? Keep in mind, Moss has the record with 17. He was a JUCO transfer that was one and done at Tennessee, of course he doesn't run masterful routes like a technician. You like a high floor guy in Hopkins, I acknowledge he has a high floor. But what is 10-12 TDs (if not starting five games) if not a pretty high floor. And his ceiling is much higher. But again, if you reread what I actually said, not your misrepresented grotesque, I said neither of us could be wrong. Let me repeat that. I said neither of us could be wrong, BECAUSE it was a matter of interpretation and subjective taste.
Most of what we have talked about Jeffery is how you are mistaken about his weight, and whether he GAINED OR LOST weight, and HOW MUCH. You said a few times I didn't say I didn't like him, I responded you haven't said anything other than be critical of weight (allusion to work ethic also, without looking it up or quoting verbatim), so that wasn't exactly a glowing apparaisal. I invited you to say something positive, you declined. We already went through that, I'm not reaching for anything, another misrepresentation.
You conclude with this... I'll quote you so I don't "twist your words." I wouldn't want to do that (eyes roll).
"I don't care if we go after a guard/tackle toward the end of the 1st or even the later rounds (Which is where you predominantly find interior lineman) - I'm not just set for it at the top of the draft with better prospects (like watkins) available...especially since we have an LT and we're severely lacking a #1 WR, it's not the other way around."
Again with the Jake Long will play LT for perpetuity, won't have injuries (even though he has more often than not in recent years), the miracle of modern medicine (maybe we can bionically rebuild him?) means Robinson won't play LT for many years. You just heckled me for not knowing how the boards are stacked in another thread. Which is it, Mr. Pot calling the kettle black, how can you know Watkins is a better prospect if I can't know Robinson is as good a prospect. We have to throw out all scouting information, right? Or you scouted Watkins? Well I scouted Robinson. We have a LT, if another body part doesn't explode, which means we don't know whether we do or not. We could use a RT in a year. We could use a guard now. That kind of versatility isn't a bad thing. I realize you aren't set for it. I'm not set for Bradford getting hurt, the front office and coaching staff giving up on him, and we have to hit the reset button on the position, setting us back another 2-3 years... unless the next QB gets hurt, too (so now are we set back 4-6 years?), behind an OL that is lousy because we didn't shore it up and plan for the future with an infusion of talent and youth, and which Jake Long may no longer even be a part of because he will at that time be in his 30s, and his recent injury history is alarming and disturbing.
Bradford was projecting for 33 TDs, closer to 40 without all the drops and penalties. DESPITE all the handicaps, not having Stacy the first month, Cook being new, Austin a rookie, not having an INTERIM guard as good as Robinson. You keep dodging this point, too. How many passing TDs do you need to have in order to acknowledge maybe our receiving weapons aren't as bad as you think (if I say bashing, you will say I didn't say that, so I phrased it that way)? It is like dodging the Patterson question (Would he have needed to get 20-30 TDs as a rookie before you would concede he might be better and have higher upside than Hopkins?). Does Bradford need to get 50 passing TDs? 60 TDs?