phenom Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 Rovers I think you understand it perfectly. It was an overreaction pick. It was the result of past frustration with previous kickers. And you know what I'm glad they did. I would do it again. Having a reliable kicker is a secure feeling. He doesn't have to lead the league but just make 80-85% of your kicks and I would be satisfied. Can't you understand that paying for a GOOD veteran kicker or drafting Edinger later would have given them the ability to get a REALLY REALLY GOOD player with the seventeenth pick? That would have made them even better! 706534[/snapback] To me, "filling a need" and "drastically overpaying" is the difference in this case. 706526[/snapback] I can answer this with an analogy....if you are in the middle of the desert, out of gas and have been sitting by your car for the last 6 hours waiting for somebody, anybody to come help you......a tow truck comes by and says he will tow your car to the nearest gas station 40 miles up the road......but it's gonna cost you 500 bucks.....you know you are getting overcharged but you're gonna pay it because AT THIS POINT IN TIME YOU NEED IT. It filled a need and the Raiders didn't mind paying for it. Plus, now, 5 years later, you've got a kicker, but there are huge holes at RB, WR, QB, TE, LB, and DB? 706537[/snapback] You did draft a LB in the first round and just like the Raiders you still need a LB. And a safety and some cornerbacks and some defensive tackles. Wow the Colts have some holes to fill also, imagine that.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 (edited) Rovers I think you understand it perfectly. It was an overreaction pick. It was the result of past frustration with previous kickers. And you know what I'm glad they did. I would do it again. 706626[/snapback] This is the part that cracks me up. You'd do it again? Knowing that Shaun Alexander is there? Yeah, right. Especially considering the string of crappy running backs the Raiders have had. If you were pissed about bad kickers, what about under-achieving running backs? If only they'd drafted Alexander. . . You did draft a LB in the first round and just like the Raiders you still need a LB. And a safety and some cornerbacks and some defensive tackles. Wow the Colts have some holes to fill also, imagine that.......... 706626[/snapback] Actually, the Colts will probably not draft a middle linebacker. I think they'll fill the position from within. David Thornton is a restricted free agent, and should be back at strong-side LB. Cato June is still signed and should return as weak-side LB. The Colts have Gilbert Gardner and Kendyll Pope waiting in the wings. That's why I said I don't think Morris will be missed. The Colts did a good job drafting young linebackers to replace him. You have to remember, Morris tore up his knee as a rookie. Who knows how much that affected him from reaching his full potential. Why do the Colts need a safety? They have Mike Doss and Bob Sanders? Why do the Colts need cornerbacks? Donald Strickland and Jason David both of whom started last year are under contract. Von Hutchins is under contract. Starter Joseph Jefferson is a restricted free agent, and should be back. Defensive tackles? The Colts have Montae Reagor, Brad Scioli, Larry Triplett, and Josh Williams all signed. Of course they have some depth to pick up in the draft, but at least they didn't waste any of their first rounders on a kicker. Edited February 21, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted February 21, 2005 Author Share Posted February 21, 2005 Rovers I think you understand it perfectly. It was an overreaction pick. It was the result of past frustration with previous kickers. And you know what I'm glad they did. I would do it again. Having a reliable kicker is a secure feeling. He doesn't have to lead the league but just make 80-85% of your kicks and I would be satisfied.I can answer this with an analogy....if you are in the middle of the desert, out of gas and have been sitting by your car for the last 6 hours waiting for somebody, anybody to come help you......a tow truck comes by and says he will tow your car to the nearest gas station 40 miles up the road......but it's gonna cost you 500 bucks.....you know you are getting overcharged but you're gonna pay it because AT THIS POINT IN TIME YOU NEED IT. It filled a need and the Raiders didn't mind paying for it. You did draft a LB in the first round and just like the Raiders you still need a LB. And a safety and some cornerbacks and some defensive tackles. Wow the Colts have some holes to fill also, imagine that.......... 706626[/snapback] That analogy works to a point, but it leaves off the second half of the story...that there will be a number of cheaper tow trucks coming a little later, who may or may not be able to tow you in just as effectively. And, with the money you save on the towing fees with the cheaper truck, you may be able to get some kick-aas naked lady mud flaps for your car. We can go in circles with this argument for ever and ever, but to me, the opportunity cost of drafting a kicker with the 17th pick in the draft is too high. I think there are too many positions on the football field that are SO much more important. I know that the draft is a crap shoot to begin with, so taking a "sure thing" at your biggest area of need makes sense. I also believe that the Raiders would be better off today if they hadn't acted with a kneejerk and had tried to build some depth into the franchise. It's worked out reasonably well for them, but not significantly better, and not for the opportunity that they gave up. And I should know a thing or two about drafting specialists too high - nothing like trading up to draft a punter in the third round only to watch him ride the pine all year - thanks again, Sherm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 This is the part that cracks me up. You'd do it again? Knowing that Shaun Alexander is there? Yeah, right. Especially considering the string of crappy running backs the Raiders have had. If you were pissed about bad kickers, what about under-achieving running backs? If only they'd drafted Alexander. . .Actually, the Colts will probably not draft a middle linebacker. I think they'll fill the position from within. David Thornton is a restricted free agent, and should be back at strong-side LB. Cato June is still signed and should return as weak-side LB. The Colts have Gilbert Gardner and Kendyll Pope waiting in the wings. That's why I said I don't think Morris will be missed. The Colts did a good job drafting young linebackers to replace him. You have to remember, Morris tore up his knee as a rookie. Who knows how much that affected him from reaching his full potential. Why do the Colts need a safety? They have Mike Doss and Bob Sanders? Why do the Colts need cornerbacks? Donald Strickland and Jason David both of whom started last year are under contract. Von Hutchins is under contract. Starter Joseph Jefferson is a restricted free agent, and should be back. Defensive tackles? The Colts have Montae Reagor, Brad Scioli, Larry Triplett, and Josh Williams all signed. Of course they have some depth to pick up in the draft, but at least they didn't waste any of their first rounders on a kicker. 706680[/snapback] Dude you need 10 new players on defense, don't try and church it up............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 (edited) Dude you need 10 new players on defense, don't try and church it up............ 706744[/snapback] I guess that's better than needing 22 entirely new players like the Raiders do. . . But at least you've got your kicker! Edited February 21, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 I guess that's better than needing 22 entirely new players like the Raiders do. . .But at least you've got your kicker! 706774[/snapback] Yeah but we know we are rebuilding. You guys are fooled into thinking you have a chance at winning. Who said that the Patriots are "ripe for the picking". The Colts always seem to be coming up short. At least the Eagles made it to the Super Bowl. Oh yeah you don't even want to make it there.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 (edited) Yeah but we know we are rebuilding. You guys are fooled into thinking you have a chance at winning. Who said that the Patriots are "ripe for the picking". The Colts always seem to be coming up short. At least the Eagles made it to the Super Bowl. Oh yeah you don't even want to make it there.......... 706798[/snapback] Newsflash Raider fan: The Raiders are the poster child for coming up short. 2000, 2001, 2002. How did the Raiders, in their prime, do against those Pats? The Eagles have the distinct advantage of not having to be in the Patriots conference. And I didn't say I don't want the Colts to make it there, I said I would rather lose in the play-offs than get slaughtered 48-21 in a Super Bowl, like you know who. . . Commitment to Excrement! Edited February 21, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 (edited) Newsflash Raider fan: The Raiders are the poster child for coming up short. 2000, 2001, 2002. How did the Raiders, in their prime, do against those Pats? The Eagles have the distinct advantage of not having to be in the Patriots conference. And I didn't say I don't want the Colts to make it there, I said I would rather lose in the play-offs than get slaughtered 48-21 in a Super Bowl, like you know who. . . Commitment to Excrement! 706800[/snapback] Amazingly they did beat the Patriots 27-20 in 2002. They also didn't look like crap when they lost in the playoff's to Patriots either. They came the closest of any team to beating the Patriots in the playoff's in the last 4 years. Since they had the lead with 2 minutes to go in the game. They also went to the Super Bowl with the Patriots in their conference, but so what. I don't have a Patriots complex like the Colts do. So that's just like your attitude toward siglines; you don't want to take the chance of being humiliated so you'd rather not even go. Well then you shouldn't even try to make the playoffs either, why go if you are going to get beat down. Oh you mean like that 41-0 ass whipping the Jets put on the Colts. They should have taken your advice and not even shown up. One thing about you Capt is you always take things personal about the Colts. It's okay to be a homer but your team is not perfect. Remember that............. Edited February 21, 2005 by phenom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 (edited) Amazingly they did beat the Patriots 27-20 in 2002. They also didn't look like crap when they lost in the playoff's to Patriots either. They came the closest of any team to beating the Patriots in the playoff's in the last 4 years. Since they had the lead with 2 minutes to go in the game. They also went to the Super Bowl with the Patriots in their conference, but so what. I don't have a Patriots complex like the Colts do. So that's just like your attitude toward siglines; you don't want to take the chance of being humiliated so you'd rather not even go. Well then you shouldn't even try to make the playoffs either, why go if you are going to get beat down. Oh you mean like that 41-0 ass whipping the Jets put on the Colts. They should have taken your advice and not even shown up. One thing about you Capt is you always take things personal about the Colts. It's okay to be a homer but your team is not perfect. Remember that............. 706828[/snapback] I'm not the one who started to drag other people's favorite teams into this. It was you and Vatican Hitsquad, so don't lecture me about taking things personal. This started out as a why I thought Janikowski was a bad pick in the 2000 draft with the seventeenth pick. You guys decided to bring the Colts and their choices into it. As far as sig lines go, what are you talking about? I lost a sigline bet with msaint due to the Colts/Pats game and wore the sig for about a month. You don't know your facts yet again. Not surprising. Did the Raiders beat the Pats in the play-offs? No. Close don't count except in horseshoes and hand grenades. Check out this score: 1990 AFC Championship Raiders 3 Bills 51 Wow. I can find bad games for the Raiders too. Edited February 22, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 (edited) One thing about you Capt is you always take things personal about the Colts. It's okay to be a homer but your team is not perfect. Remember that............. 706828[/snapback] You mean like how I've said several times in this thread how the Colts made a mistake in taking Rob Morris? Or did you see my post after the Colts vs. Patriots game? You are the guy fiercely defending taking a kicker in the first round by dumping on the Colts choices. Physician, heal thyself................... Edited February 22, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 I'm not the one who started to drag other people's favorite teams into this. It 706974[/snapback] Whatever you have between you and Hitsquad is your thing, I didn't say anything derogatory about the Colts until you got on your high horse about how the Raiders have holes to fill. I compared the Rob Morris pick to Janikowski. That's it and no matter how you want to spin it the Raiders are getting more from their 1st round pick than the Colts are. Janikowski is still with the Raiders, Morris will not be. You want to criticize a pick criticize your own team for that lousy pick they are getting rid of. You don't want to even listen to the reasoning or see that there might be another point of view. You just see kicker bad pick. That's the end of your reasoning. Well good for you. Don't get all high and mighty now, msaint. I don't want to make the bet with you until after the Colts vs. Broncos game. Call me superstitious. 646575[/snapback] I'm gonna have to see the sig line before I agree to it, for sure! 633708[/snapback] Yeah, I'm gonna have to admit that playing in NE is a bit of a downer. Colts are a turnover prone bunch in that stadium, for some reason. But I'd hate to have some ridiculously untasteful sig line. By the way, nice sig line, phenom 633826[/snapback] I smell pu$$y in those statements. I'm talking about how scary you are when someone challenges you to a sigline bet. It took you 2 months to get your panties unwound to step up to the bet. Those are the facts. Newsflash Raider fan: The Raiders are the poster child for coming up short. 2000, 2001, 2002. How did the Raiders, in their prime, do against those Pats? Commitment to Excrement! 706800[/snapback] You didn't say the playoff's you said how we did against them recently. We only played the Pat's once in the playoff's. And much better than the Colts have represented. The Raiders have also beaten the Pat's in the last 5 years which isn't something the Colts can say either. Commitment to Excrement? Why bother responding to that. Do the Colts even have an identity to mock? Well nothing in the last 35 years. Wow. I can find bad games for the Raiders too. 706974[/snapback] Can you? How much you want to bet I can find more bad games for the Colts than the Raiders? Sigline bet?................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 (edited) Are you serious? Whatever you have between you and Hitsquad is your thing, I didn't say anything derogatory about the Colts until you got on your high horse about how the Raiders have holes to fill. I compared the Rob Morris pick to Janikowski. 707025[/snapback] You didn't, eh? How 'bout this: I mean look at who the Colts took in 2000; Rob Morris and didn't you say he wasn't going to be missed. I think that shows you who had a better pick.......... 706065[/snapback] or this: What do you mean he won't be missed because he is a free agent? Will Edge not be missed because he is a free agent? Would Shaun Alexander not be missed because he is a free agent? Would all those players franchised not be missed because they are free agents? Rob Morris won't be missed because they realize he wasn't going to make the Colts D any better.706094[/snapback] and then this: I would also like to mention the Pats have won 5 playoff games by 3 points or less including 2 Super Bowls. Whereas the Colts haven't won any playoff games of 6 points or less. The Colts offense is usually either very good or very bad. Vanderjagt is rarely the difference in the Colts winning or losing a game. Even though he did miss that FG in the first game of the year vs the Patriots costing the Colts possible homefield advantage............ 706105[/snapback] Of course, the above was innaccurate, but you're never about getting facts right. And then there was this: He was also tied for 5th with 12 touchbacks. Vanderjagt? He had none and the Colts had to bring in someone to kickoff for him. Plus what does your QB and coach think of him........ 706335[/snapback] and this I sure wish the Raiders could have blown their draft pick on Morris though706411[/snapback] All of that was before I got on my "high horse" and said the Raiders had holes to fill? What planet do you live on? They do have holes. They had 5 wins last year. You want to criticize a pick criticize your own team for that lousy pick they are getting rid of. You don't want to even listen to the reasoning or see that there might be another point of view. You just see kicker bad pick. That's the end of your reasoning. Well good for you. 707025[/snapback] Dude. This is a message board. The original question was about the 2000 draft. I merely posted the number of busts in the first round. AND I DID POST ON PAGE ONE THAT MORRIS FAILED TO LIVE UP TO EXPECTATIONS. You and Hitsquad got your Raiders panties in a bunch cause I called out the Raiders, and said IN MY OPINION they made an awful pick by taking a kicker in the first round. Strange that everyone that isn't a Raider fan feels it was a reach, and not the best pick. Guess what? I'm allowed to have my opinion. In my opinion, taking a LB who is solid, if not spectacular, is a better pick than taking a good kicker. Kickers are a dime a dozen. If you don't want to hear it, quit reading! I'm talking about how scary you are when someone challenges you to a sigline bet. It took you 2 months to get your panties unwound to step up to the bet. Those are the facts.707025[/snapback] OK, so I didn't want to make a bet until the game was going to occur. So what? I'm superstitious. Guess what? I have lucky Colts socks! I didn't want to jinx it! As for the tastefulness request, DMD wants to keep it clean in here for kids, I wasn't going to have a sig line containing a depiction of gay oral sex, as was msaints original suggestion. Is that OK with you? So I'm a feline 'cause I wanted to keep it football related? Whatever. The Raiders have also beaten the Pat's in the last 5 years which isn't something the Colts can say either. 707025[/snapback] Once again, do you ever know what you are talking about? October 22, 2000: Indy 30 New England 23. And last I checked, that was less than 5 years ago. How much you want to bet I can find more bad games for the Colts than the Raiders? Sigline bet?................ 707025[/snapback] Man, where were you Big Man for the Raiders vs. Colts in week 5? Pu$$y? Sigline bet on what? Doesn't Swerski have your sig for another year or something anyway? Is this bitterness spilling over from when I called you out for not knowing what you were talking about when you were trying to explain the cap ramifications of Vick's contract? I'd of thought you were used to being wrong by now.................. Edited February 22, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soopanuts Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 Wow... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 yea..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted February 22, 2005 Author Share Posted February 22, 2005 The original question was about the 2000 draft. 707057[/snapback] Yeah, then you two came and took over my very important Jets/Draft Picks thread...hijacking is bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 22, 2005 Share Posted February 22, 2005 Yeah, then you two came and took over my very important Jets/Draft Picks thread...hijacking is bad 707330[/snapback] LOL, sorry. Your question was answered though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted February 22, 2005 Author Share Posted February 22, 2005 LOL, sorry. Your question was answered though. 707447[/snapback] Indeed it was. And some spirited debate, on subject or off, always makes the day go faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Newsflash Raider fan: The Raiders are the poster child for coming up short. 2000, 2001, 2002. How did the Raiders, in their prime, do against those Pats? The Eagles have the distinct advantage of not having to be in the Patriots conference. And I didn't say I don't want the Colts to make it there, I said I would rather lose in the play-offs than get slaughtered 48-21 in a Super Bowl, like you know who. . . Commitment to Excrement! 706800[/snapback] Coming up short-- we made it to the Super Bowl... a game you would rather not make, I understand... Enjoy another 30 year abscence as you guys keep drafting short-term LBs in teh 1st rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 I'm not the one who started to drag other people's favorite teams into this. It was you and Vatican Hitsquad, so don't lecture me about taking things personal. This started out as a why I thought Janikowski was a bad pick in the 2000 draft with the seventeenth pick. You guys decided to bring the Colts and their choices into it. 706974[/snapback] The Colts were brought in to try to bring some perspective into this for you, somethign you could maybe understand. Was the Colts draft terrible because they could have drafted 3 Super Bowl winning QB Tom Brady? No, they already had a QB who is filling the position nicely, despite his lack of Super Bowl wins. But you can't understand that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 (edited) Coming up short-- we made it to the Super Bowl... a game you would rather not make, I understand... Enjoy another 30 year abscence as you guys keep drafting short-term LBs in teh 1st rd. 708427[/snapback] Please. Let's compare first rounders 1996 Colts: Marvin Harrison Raiders: Rickey Dudley :snicker: 1997 Colts: Tarik Glenn Raiders: Darrell Russell 1998 Colts: Peyton Manning Raiders:Charles Woodson and Mo Collins Is Woodson going to stick around? Collins is no longer with the Raiders. 1999 Colts: Edgerrin James Raiders: Matt Stinchcomb Are any of the Raiders first rounders still on the team? 2000 Colts: Rob Morris Raiders: Sebastian Janikowski In my opinion, the Colts still win. 2001 Colts: Reggie Wayne Raiders: Derrick Gibson Wow. 149 tackles and 3 picks in 4 years. Nice! 2002 Colts: Dwight Freeney Raiders:Phillip Buchanon and Napolean Harris Supposedly the Raiders aren't all that enamored with Buchanon, and I hear the Radiers have already shopped Harris. . . 2003 Colts: Dallas Clark Raiders: Nnamdi Asomugha and Tyler Brayton Even when the Raiders get two picks, they still can't get a player. 2004 Colts: Bob Sanders (second round selection) Raiders: Robert Gallery Yeah, the Raiders have done so much better with their selections. Now I see why you think Janikowski was a good pick! The Raiders make some pretty terrible choices, so a kicker that is still with the team must seem like a steal! Edited February 23, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Heh, all that typing, and the bottom line is the Raiders still went on a 3 year run after that "terrible" pick where they won their div, played in 2 AFC Championship games and played in a Super Bowl. And he's still the starter. Aaaand where have all you great picks gotten you? Right. A plane back to Indi. It's funny, since you totally missed the orignal reason of why the Colts picks were brought up in the first place. But you seem about as sharp as a Colts horshoe. With that, I declare victory in this debate (I would first like to thank God...), and I'm leaving this thread now that it is run into the ground after derailing it from it's original origins (sorry Fatman). Hitsquad... OUT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 (edited) Yes, the Raiders got two second place AFC finishes, and one second place NFL title. How was the parade? Now, that's something to be proud of. Do you have any Raiders Second Place t-shirts? Oh well, those who lose debates usually have to declare themselves the winner. Janikowski was, and still is a terrible waste of a first round draft pick. But, like I said, with the Raiders recent draft history I guess I can see how a poor Raider fan thinks it was decent, considering he still is with the team. But that really isn't saying much. . . Edited February 23, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 (edited) Yes, the Raiders got two second place AFC finishes, and one second place NFL title. How was the parade? Now, that's something to be proud of. Do you have any Raiders Second Place t-shirts? Oh well, those who lose debates usually have to declare themselves the winner. Janikowski was, and still is a terrible waste of a first round draft pick. But, like I said, with the Raiders recent draft history I guess I can see how a poor Raider fan thinks it was decent, considering he still is with the team. But that really isn't saying much. . . 708988[/snapback] How can you say you won the debate? Didn't you say in your long winded tangent that all you are is offering your opinion? Which means nothing especially on a message board. Also if you feel like it was a bad pick that is your prerogative. So what. I like to look at the end result and see that it helped the Raiders to 3 consecutive division titles, 2 AFC championships and the Super Bowl. As far as your incessant need to compare the Colts to the Raiders, why? In the last 10 years the Raiders have beaten the Colts 3 of 4 games with the Colts finally winning one this past year. Oooooohhh wow that's something you can have a parade for. No wait they can point to their excellent draft record. It's certainly taken them nowhere. Just let me know when we can watch the playoff's without having to see Manning explain why the Colts choked again. That's one of the most pathetic scenes a Colts fan would have to endure. But then they have to be used to it. I mean they have their fans saying "Don't go to the playoff's if we're going to get our a$$ handed to us, it's just not worth it!". Pitiful, no wonder Edge wants to leave to the worst team in the NFL. He knows the Colts will never be a winner........... Edited February 24, 2005 by phenom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 (edited) How can you say you won the debate? Didn't you say in your long winded tangent that all you are is offering your opinion? Which means nothing especially on a message board. Also if you feel like it was a bad pick that is your prerogative. So what. I like to look at the end result and see that it helped the Raiders to 3 consecutive division titles, 2 AFC championships and the Super Bowl. As far as your incessant need to compare the Colts to the Raiders, why? In the last 10 years the Raiders have beaten the Colts 3 of 4 games with the Colts finally winning one this past year. Oooooohhh wow that's something you can have a parade for. No wait they can point to their excellent draft record. It's certainly taken them nowhere. Just let me know when we can watch the playoff's without having to see Manning explain why the Colts choked again. That's one of the most pathetic scenes a Colts fan would have to endure. But then they have to be used to it. I mean they have their fans saying "Don't go to the playoff's if we're going to get our a$$ handed to us, it's just not worth it!". Pitiful, no wonder Edge wants to leave to the worst team in the NFL. He knows the Colts will never be a winner........... 709681[/snapback] : Ways phenom is incorrect yet again: 1. Your bud Vatican Hitsquad declared victory first. I was just mocking him. 2. You brought up the Colts first, not me. When you were losing the argument, you decided to compare the Colts selections. 3. I never said I didn't want the Colts to make the play-offs 4. Edge has never said he wants to leave Indianapolis. Keep tryin'! Edited February 24, 2005 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phenom Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 : Ways phenom is incorrect yet again: 1. Your bud Vatican Hitsquad declared victory first. I was just mocking him. 2. You brought up the Colts first, not me. When you were losing the argument, you decided to compare the Colts selections. 3. I never said I didn't want the Colts to make the play-offs 4. Edge has never said he wants to leave Indianapolis. Keep tryin'! 709862[/snapback] 1. I'm not arguing for Hitsquad so get that through your head 2. Wrong you brought up what the Colts did multiple times before I even got in the conversation ie: That would have been tough to do, considering Pennington was drafted with the eighteenth pick, and the Colts had the twenty-eighth choice. And most draft "experts" had Janikowski going to the Rams at the end of the first round at the earliest. For the Raiders to reach at 17 and take a kicker is just a terrible choice. Just because the guy is a good kicker, doesn't mean it was a good pick. Hell, the Colts could have drafted Vanderjagt with their first round pick instead of picking him up as a free agent. Would that make it a good pick? No. 705930[/snapback] You also said that Rob Morris was a bad pick for the Colts: Oh, and I can readily admit that Morris was a bad choice for the Colts. The Colts needed a middle linebacker badly. Morris was the best available. Unfortunately, he'd never actually played the position at BYU. He didn't even know what "4-3" or "3-4" meant when he came to the Colts. They just dropped him in the middle of the field and said, "Get the ballcarrier" in college. He has been a starter after tearing up his knee his rookie year. He has been in the top 3 in tackles for the Colts every year. And he sucks. Just because he's stuck with the team doesn't mean he was a good pick. Imagine, the Colts could have drafted Keith Bullock. 705937[/snapback] You admit Rob Morris sucks. So right here you would rather have drafted someone who sucks than at least having a kicker who is contributing to the teams success. 3. Honestly, I'd rather miss the Super Bowl than get to one and get slaughtered. . . 706431[/snapback] This is more of your Monday Morning QB nonsense. You sure can make a good decision after the fact. "Hey let's not go to the Super Bowl, we're gonna lose BIG! No point in going through that." 4. Yeah you can delude yourself if you want to. We all know Edge would be gone if he wasn't franchised......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.