Muffdiver............LOL, just because Wally agreed with you doesn't make him the only person to "know something about football". Seriously welcome to then NFL Union, but dude not everyone is gonna agree with you deal with it. You bring up some good points at times, but at times your just babbling nonsense and bringing up off topic remarks and try to make it all one argument. Just take it easy because like I said......NOT EVERYONE IS GONNA AGREE WITH YOU SO DEAL WITH IT.

Espurs117

Read the damn posts!  I said he's the Wally was the only one to make me say "touche", which means he brought up a good counter argument.  You guys half ass read things and then make make these off the wall comments.  I know people aren't always going to agree, but if they are going to argue, use valid arguments, and don't limit the debate to strictly football being every sport shares in it's similarites, like how to win.  He brought up basketball, I rebutted.  He then only wanted to talk stats and throw how he is right all over the board because he felt it, so I used the Chewbacca defense because it made no sense just like his claim over him being right.  Stop seeing things as right and wrong or black and white.  You have to admit the Chewbacca thing was kinda of funny.  I want someone to make me second guess myself, there are some things I'm not that good with, keeping up with stats and or league news.  I do know that I have an uncanny ability to see talent and know how to pick winners.  Knowledge is one thing, understanding is another. 

My bad, I get certain trivial points confused.  Point being it changed how much superstar talent is vs. a draft pick.

[QUOTE="muffdiver1982"]

[QUOTE="Espurs117"]Other than Nick Barnett that Linebacker core was pathetic. They needed Hawk more than they needed Davis. Franks isn't horrible, ill agree he aint great but he isn't bad. Also stop comparing this guy to all time greats like Shannon Sharpe. Kellen Winslow Jr. came into the NFL as the "best TE coming out of college ever" and he hasn't done a thing. Servicable linebackers? what about tight ends...Alge Crumpler 2nd round, Jason Witten 3rd round, Randy McMichael 4th round, Chris Cooley 3rd round, Antonio Gates was undrafted. They could of gotten a serviceable Tight end later in the round like Lenard Pope or David Thomas....No way they find anyone close to A.J. Hawk after pick 5.bgres077

First of all, the one game Kellen Winslow played in, the Browns won. The other game he got hurt early and they lost. He's been injured the rest of the time, so that argument is complete ca-ca. If you are looking toward the future, you have to grab Davis. He has superman strength, runs good routes, is faster than most WR's. With him and Franks the could run a really good 2TE set, they could use Davis in spread formations, they could even use him as a situational short yardage running back. He offers so many different options that he could be compared as the Reggie Bush of TE's. He is a special and rare talent, and he is a can't miss prospect if he stays healthy. Also, some scouts think Bobby Carpenter, is more NFL ready than Hawk. Everyone who thought they needed to draft certain types of linebackers overlooked Zach Thomas in his draft, and he had one of the best rookie seasons at linebacker, and look at how good he is now. He fell to what the 5th round or something like that. They needed to improve that offense especially after trading Javon Walker, and they didn't. It's like why does the Saints draft Bush, when they have Deuce, Aaron Stecker, and the recently acquired Michael Bennett (who was just traded away, don't point out the obvious to me again). Because Bush adds a different dimension to the game. Just like Davis. I don't think that Bush should have been drafted by the Saints and I thought his best fit was the Jets, being Curtis Martin is coming close to retiring. 1.Packers have a young 1st round QB who has Jim Drunkenmiller written all over him, unless they bring in some good offensive players. Long term, Davis was the better pick. A.J. Hawk is just a band-aid on poor run defense. 2.If they were serious about winning they would've re-signed Na'il Diggs,who isn't that bad IMO. He was also a later round find. Now he's getting paid big money.

Read the whole sentence. 

#1 Aaron Rodgers would become a bust if the Packers don't get him offensive help.  QB's are judged on stats and mostly wins vs. losses.  He will not win or have great stats if the offense isn't improved.

#2 Na'il Diggs may not be an elite player, but he is good and better than most.  If they were that worried about their defense, they should have made a serious offer to re-sign him, being they drafted 1 LB to fill a hole and now they they have to find a replacement for Diggs.

So your saying because some "scouts" say Bobby was more NFL better than Hawk, if the packers should of taken any linebacker they should of taken Carpenter?...well in that case hey dallas send em a trade they cant refuse it, ill be happy....anyways dont compare the saints and bush to the packers and davis. Hey the saints dont have anyone at Tight end either, why didnt the take Davis?....because bush was the best player in the draft, and no one was gonna pass up on him even if you dont need him, unless your GM is an idiot (texans). The only ppl taking Vernon Davis were the ppl who needed him, unlike bush who you would just take because he had so much value. Vernon Davis is gonna be good, and might get ROTY but AJ Hawk will turn out to be better. The Packers needed help at defense and they got the best defensive player in the draft IMO, yeah even better than Mario. Oh and btw Vernon Davis was a 1st rounder but he skyrocketed up there because of his combine, which is the most overhyped thing ever. Hell anyone can impress wearing nothing but gym shorts running around on turf. AJ Hawk had done it for years and he did it on the playing field not the combine. Dont blame the Packers for taking the needed and most obvious pick.Espurs117

Ok God!  I forgot you're an officer on this board so might makes right!  Davis was considered the best athlete in this draft.  You can compare him to Bush, the only difference is teams don't usually put that kind of importance on TE's.  No one has seen a TE of this caliber come out of college since Winslow, and Winslow isn't as talented as Davis.  You compare needs and say that because of needs you don't take Davis.  The Saints should have taken Davis over Bush, so should the Texans.  That's why those teams will always be drafting at the top.  The Saints also didn't address any needs in the later rounds.  And BTW, check news reel again, Davis was projected as the best TE before the combine.  A.J. Hawk wasn't the most needed and obvious pick.  Are you on Meth or shrooms or what?  Packers defense wasn't as bad as people let on.  Their offense was so bad that their defense spent more time than they should have.  Do you understand how the trading system works.  Dallas would have had to give up more than the pick for Carpenter to be picking at #5.  Carpenter just didn't have as great of a combine or the publicity Hawk was getting.  Hawk also jumped above Chad Greenway in the combine.  So you can take the arguement about the combine and shove it where the sun don't shine because it doesn't strengthen your argument at all.  No other TE in history has had the physical abilities as Davis, none!  A.J. Hawk is no Lawerence Taylor, he's not a freak of nature, and he won't change how defenses are played.  Davis and Bush both have the talent to revolutionize how their positions are played.  Davis could play every down, if the 49ers choose to do so. 

Who the hell are you to tell people how they can and can't argue?  Your argument is coming back and forth over itself.  All I see is contradiction after contradiction.  Follow your leaders example, his argument made the most sense.  You sound like a GM defending his pick.  Fact is linebacker could have been addressed later, and Davis is a special talent whether you like it or not.  A.J. Hawk is nothing but a band-aid, and will probably wind up on another team once his contract expires. 

Also, why was Antonio Gates not drafted, maybe because he never played college football.  The rest that you point out are good TE's but none have Davis' abilities.  Also, Mario was only picked first because of his size.  He underachieved against small schools and he was joined by 2 other 1st rounders on NC States DL, one which I think was actually better than Mario Williams and that's Manny Lawson.  You can't compare a TE to a LB just like you can't compare Cy Young to Babe Ruth.  Hawk is always going to be a better linebacker than Davis and Davis is always going to be a better TE.  Duh!  Just like Ruth was a better hitter and Young was a better pitcher.  You also said that because some scouts said that Cedric Benson looked like Ricky Williams that getting a hair cut would change his draft position.  Everyone knows that every teams lies pre-draft and leak out bad info.  A hair cut doesn't turn a boy into a man.  Oh my, I feel like I'm on the amateur hour.  Seriously, what is your point?  If you think Hawk was a better pick, then good for you.  But don't down play a rookies abilities before he steps up on a field and exalt another like you did with Bush or Hawk.  The Saints had a two Pro Bowl running backs and a 3rd good back up.  Michael Bennett fell off a little last year and was injury pron, that was his only fault.  They had to get rid of him after drafting Bush, which they did.  The Saints made a publicity pick, not a need pick.  Davis would have been a safer pick if you are looking at getting some talent and investing in your young quarterback.  Most of Green Bay's problems came from injuries on offense Davis would have added depth, and because of his natural abilities could have been moved into playing different positions had the need a rised.  If their offense is just as bad this year, than their defense is still gonna be statistically horrible.  Because they'll lose the T.O.P. battle and teams will run the ball to secure their lead.  Cause and Effect.  Your best defense is sometimes your best offense?  Any of that ring a bell?  Offense wins games but defense wins championships, but you need to win games in order to make the playoffs.  Open you eyes and actually see what is being said instead of blinded by your own opinions.  Wally was the only one that had a decent argument on why A.J. Hawk was decent pick. 

[QUOTE="muffdiver1982"]

Yeah, but he doesn't have the leadership ability, or the blocking skills, he can't break tackles like Ward, he can't throw the ball like Ward, so he can't be as utilized in trick plays like Ward can, or dominate his teams offensive stats like Ward did, being that's what you covet so badly.  With Ward you have to worry about a WR Pass as well as a Reverse.  Your are looking at minor details, instead of the big picture.  I'm sick of arguing futile and ignorant points, so I'm pulling out the big guns now.  Only thing I seem to see are ridiculous arguments over even more ridiculous points, so I'm going to go and explain this in a manner that you'll probably understand.

This is Chewbacca, he's a wookie.  Over here, we have planet Endor, which is inhabited by Ewoks.  Chewbacca can't live on Endor, because it makes no sense!  Chewbacca and Ewoks?  It makes no sense!  We are here talking football and I'm off talking about Chewbacca because this whole thing makes no sense!  If Chewbacca lives on Endor than Moss is the best receiver.  He does not and so this whole arguement makes no sense.   

Oh, yeah!  That's right I pulled out Johnny Cochran's Chewbacca defense.  It's about as useless and pointless as arguing anything with you because systems dictate stats, therefore you can't base the greatest strictly on stats, like you are doing.  You have to look at overall team production vs. individual stats, then you have to look at his importance to his team, you have to look at his leadership abilities, and everyway he makes his team better.  Ward makes that team gel, he improves the running and passing games, and he helps developing rookies.  He is one of the five best receivers in the league because he is one of the five individuals who provided the greatest impacts with his team.

mgreener_34

I write like a page and a half because I 'm that passionate about football.  My God, you have to be kidding me with that whole thing about Star Wars.  Apparently you just don't get it do you.  I wasn't getting off subject, I was pointing out how ingorant your argument is.  The Chewbacca thing was a South Park reference.  You know, "no one can argue against Johnny Cochran's Chewbacca defense, it got O.J. off."  I swear, you are giving me a tumor on my brain with this.   

You pick the worst possible choice at QB as the greatest, you pick one dimensional WR Moss as the greatest.  Right now your knowledge doesn't seem to even measure up with amateur, rather than expert.  Your arguments are based stricly on stats.  You are not even close to making me say "touché".  When you look at wins and losses, individual vs. rest of the team stats, and/or efficiency stats.  Then look me up and argue.  My grandmother is dead, and she could pass for 5,000 yards in a Texas Tech offense, does that make her the best QB because she can throw for 5,000 yards in an offense that passes 80% of the time and uses a spread set.  I don't think they've had a QB in the last couple years throw for less than 5,000.  The system is sick.  If stats strictly dictated how good a player is, Andre Ware would be one of the greatest QB's ever, David Klinger another one, now if we are talking wide receivers what about Peter Warrick and Desmond Howard.  Ask yourself why these guys didn't bring their collegiate success to the big game with something more than it was college, and because they sucked.  It's because you can't look at Physical stats.  Just look at A-Rod and the Yankees.  Stats don't make you great, they are only a tool for minor comparisons.  I swear, you are doing this to just make me mad, no one could be that thick headed and use such pointless arguments as yours.  If you weren't a troll, you would have backed your boy Brady in the greatest QB debate, instead of going for a one year fizzle in Naemeth.  You'd say the occasional, you have a point, but look at this and provide some physical proof to your claims statement.  I honestly feel you stick to the same point, and rather than debate and force a compromise,, you come on this board and talk about B.S. and take stabs at people to get a rise out of them and cause trouble.  That's what a troll. does.  I'm not accusing you yet, but if it looks like a rat and smells like a rat, by golly it's most likely a rat.  All you need to do is look at the first post you made, where you made a pointless argument and took a stab at me saying, "Don't you love making a great point!"  In said post you used basketball as your key argument, I rebutted and you brought it up again.  Then you stood back and kept poking me when I had the Officers telling me to move NBA discussions elsewhere when they were in comment to your bone headed statements.  This is strictly a personal attack by you, meant to get me mad, and possibly to say something to get me modded.  I'll keep arguing with you until you: A.) Provide me with decent evidence to support your claim; and B.) Make this into a discussion rather than a verbal attack, where you keep sayingg you are right, based strictly on one minor point to back your claim.  I want someone to make me say touché, and it's becoming abundantly clear that there is only one person who discusses things looking at all things/angles like I do, and that's old Wally boy.  Your board leader.  He's the only one who has gotten me to say, "touché".  He's also the only one I've seen to offer any logical insight on any of the topics on this board.  So if you want me to say you need to take stats into consideration, yeah sure you do, because you can't be the greatest sitting on a bench or suspended all the time,  but you are cheapening a player based on his stats rather than looking at the system he plays under and all the other things he brings to the table for his team.  He'll be able to still run these trick plays, did you forget that he played QB in college, I think he even played a little RB as well at Georgia.  Only reason he fell in the draft is because he played so many positions and because the doctors found out he didn't have an ACL in one of his knees.  It had nothing to do with talent.  He can catch the deep ball, he can break tackles, he can make run block, he makes the players around him better.  Your boy Moss, can only run the fly, he's a horrible leader, isn't a good route runner, afraid to go across the middle, and couldn't deliver when he demanded the ball be thrown in his direction 60% of the time.  He was put in an offense last year that made him run routes and he had a less than average year for any receiver, especially for someone who is supposed to be as good as him.  Don't blame injuries on it either, his injuries would all be manageable if he had a better workout routine in the off-season.

Other than Nick Barnett that Linebacker core was pathetic. They needed Hawk more than they needed Davis. Franks isn't horrible, ill agree he aint great but he isn't bad. Also stop comparing this guy to all time greats like Shannon Sharpe. Kellen Winslow Jr. came into the NFL as the "best TE coming out of college ever" and he hasn't done a thing. Servicable linebackers? what about tight ends...Alge Crumpler 2nd round, Jason Witten 3rd round, Randy McMichael 4th round, Chris Cooley 3rd round, Antonio Gates was undrafted. They could of gotten a serviceable Tight end later in the round like Lenard Pope or David Thomas....No way they find anyone close to A.J. Hawk after pick 5.Espurs117

First of all, the one game Kellen Winslow played in, the Browns won.  The other game he got hurt early and they lost.  He's been injured the rest of the time, so that argument is complete ca-ca.  If you are looking toward the future, you have to grab Davis.  He has superman strength, runs good routes, is faster than most WR's.  With him and Franks the could run a really good 2TE set, they could use Davis in spread formations, they could even use him as a situational short yardage running back.  He offers  so many different options that he could be compared as the Reggie Bush of TE's.  He is a special and rare talent, and he is a can't miss prospect if he stays healthy.  Also, some scouts think Bobby Carpenter, is more NFL ready than Hawk.  Everyone who thought they needed to draft certain types of linebackers overlooked Zach Thomas in his draft, and he had one of the best rookie seasons at linebacker, and look at how good he is now.  He fell to what the 5th round or something like that.  They needed to improve that offense especially after trading Javon Walker, and they didn't.  It's like why does the Saints draft Bush, when they have Deuce, Aaron Stecker, and the recently acquired Michael Bennett (who was just traded away, don't point out the obvious to me again).  Because Bush adds a different dimension to the game.  Just like Davis.  I don't think that Bush should have been drafted by the Saints and I thought his best fit was the Jets, being Curtis Martin is coming close to retiring.  Packers have a young 1st round QB who has Jim Drunkenmiller written all over him, unless they bring in some good offensive players.   Long term, Davis was the better pick.  A.J. Hawk is just a band-aid on poor run defense.  If they were serious about winning they would've  re-signed Na'il Diggs, who isn't that bad IMO.  He was also a later round find.  Now he's getting paid big money.