3 of the 4 remaining QBs

[gpphat]

Forgot about C. That is a need, for sure. Garza isn't getting any younger. I think they may need a C more than they need a QB.

And Garza definitely isn't getting any better...he has been serviceable at times but he is the weak link on the line. Which is why I would be fine if they didn't draft a QB this year so long as they can fill some holes on defense and continue to make the line younger.

 

[Bearin' Down]

Really?

Short answer. I said "seems". That clearly identifies that I am not asserting something to be the case but rather, saying how it looks to me. Doesn't it?

You say "really" here, but I have to ask that same question as to the nit picky way in which you combed through my post to attack the word claim. We all knew what you meant, and it was quite clear what I meant. So, I decided to be ticky tack with you, much the way you decided to do so with me.

As to any actual debate about this, I agree that we should stop here. I just wanted to point this out to you, as I felt, there was no reason for you to say "big difference between my opinion and the word claim" (when in reality if your argument rests on the word "seems," without any other words prior to or antecedent to the word "seems", it could hardly be said that there is a "big difference," if any at all).

 

[Bones40]

And Garza definitely isn't getting any better...he has been serviceable at times but he is the weak link on the line. Which is why I would be fine if they didn't draft a QB this year so long as they can fill some holes on defense and continue to make the line younger.

How would you feel about trading down and getting some more picks?

 

[Bones40]

You say "really" here, but I have to ask that same question as to the nit picky way in which you combed through my post to attack the word claim. We all knew what you meant, and it was quite clear what I meant. So, I decided to be ticky tack with you, much the way you decided to do so with me. As to any actual debate about this, I agree that we should stop here. I just wanted to point this out to you, as I felt, there was no reason for you to say "big difference between my opinion and the word claim"(in reality if your argument rests on the word "seems," without any other words prior to or antecedent to the word "seems", it could hardly be said that there is a "big difference," if any at all).

I didn't attack anything. I just used the definition you provided for the word "claim" to illustrate what the difference was.

I said there was a big difference, because there is a big difference. I wasn't nitpicking.

 

[gpphat]

How would you feel about trading down and getting some more picks?

Again it really matters what Emery does in FA...if he can't bring in a surefire starter at D-line and safety. I think it would be smart to trade down and get a few more picks. If he does bring in guys like Bennett and Byrd (these are just examples) then it would depend on who is available when they pick, but I wouldn't feel it would be necessary to trade down.

 

[Bearly]

I don't know if we could or not. I know for sure if we don't try, we definitely can't.

Which begs the question, Who's this years Kaepernick or Wilson? It's not like either team didn't have expensive vets to cover their asses if these guys didn't pan out. It doesn't matter if Kaep is better or not. It only matters what our options are. It's either we paid Jay too much because winning is about D or we paid him too much because some non 1st round rookie will prevail and the star QB will win it all. There are 3 good candidates this year in Mettenberger, Fales and Murray. Which one(s)?The only consistency with the anti Jay segment is that we paid Jay too much and that wouldn't have changed if it were under $15M.

 

[Bearin' Down]

I didn't attack anything. I just used the definition you provided for the word "claim" to illustrate what the difference was.

I said there was a big difference, because there is a big difference. I wasn't nitpicking.

Again, what is the "big difference" then. If it is the "seems," you seem to miss the point. You make no statement about who it seems to. So, objectively, your statement could read: It seems to everyone; It seems to me; It seems to some; It seems to none; or it's nonsensical as the word "seems" has no place in that sentence anyways.

On top of that, even assuming that "seems" was meant to be "It seems to me," which no reader outside of yourself would be able to affirmatively know, than you did claim that "It seems to me that whatever the rest of the sentence said about throwing qbs to the wolves." You provided no evidence, and asserted something to be the case, regardless of whether it was your opinion or not.

Finally, are you really arguing that a personal opinion can never be a claim? Interesting that a synonym of the word "claim" is "believe." Certainly, you aren't suggesting that there would be any difference between the sentences "It seems to me that throwing qbs to the wolves ruins them" versus "I believe that throwing qbs to the wolves ruins them." In other words, there is no "big difference." In fact, there is no difference at all. You were just being a dick and I returned the favor.

 

[ClydeLee]

Again, what is the "big difference" then. If it is the "seems," you seem to miss the point. You make no statement about who it seems to. So, objectively, your statement could read: It seems to everyone; It seems to me; It seems to some; It seems to none; or it's nonsensical as the word "seems" has no place in that sentence anyways.

On top of that, even assuming that "seems" was meant to be "It seems to me," which no reader outside of yourself would be able to affirmatively know, than you did claim that "It seems to me that whatever the rest of the sentence said about throwing qbs to the wolves." You provided no evidence, and asserted something to be the case, regardless of whether it was your opinion or not.

Finally, are you really arguing that a personal opinion can never be a claim? Interesting that a synonym of the word "claim" is "believe." Certainly, you aren't suggesting that there would be any difference between the sentences "It seems to me that throwing qbs to the wolves ruins them" versus "I believe that throwing qbs to the wolves ruins them." In other words, there is no "big difference." In fact, there is no difference at all. You were just being a dick and I returned the favor.

The use of seems in the context implies doubt in the position. That is a difference of assurance.

Sent from my LGL85C using Tapatalk 2

 

[Bearin' Down]

The use of seems in the context implies doubt in the position. That is a difference of assurance.

Sent from my LGL85C using Tapatalk 2

Again, even if that was so, the word "believes," is a synonym of the word "claims." Clearly, you cannot believe something and be 100% sure of something at the same time. If that were the case, the word "belief" and "knowledge" wouldn't be antonyms.

One more time, making a claim does not require 100% assurance. Simply put, you are taking a position as to something. He claimed that throwing qbs to the wolves ruins them more often then not. It doesn't matter if it was his opinion, it was still a claim made by him in which he took a position. It doesn't matter what he prefaced the sentence with, he still made an affirmative statement without supporting evidence. Just as I would be if I said, it seems to me that Peyton Manning is the greatest QB of all time. While it is my opinion, I am still asserting an affirmative matter, despite what I decide to preface the sentence with.

 

[Warrior Spirit]

Oh **** off. Bearmick and Spartan literally spend their entire sorry lives beating this topic to death.

And I know what you've been beating to death, Midway ***.

 

[Midway Fields]

Which begs the question, Who's this years Kaepernick or Wilson? It's not like either team didn't have expensive vets to cover their asses if these guys didn't pan out. It doesn't matter if Kaep is better or not. It only matters what our options are. It's either we paid Jay too much because winning is about D or we paid him too much because some non 1st round rookie will prevail and the star QB will win it all. There are 3 good candidates this year in Mettenberger, Fales and Murray. Which one(s)?The only consistency with the anti Jay segment is that we paid Jay too much and that wouldn't have changed if it were under $15M.

It's a secret. They'll tell you after next year. "Seeeeeeee, we could have drafted him 122nd overall and he could have replaced Cutler."

 

[Bones40]

Again, even if that was so, the word "believes," is a synonym of the word "claims." Clearly, you cannot believe something and be 100% sure of something at the same time. If that were the case, the word "belief" and "knowledge" wouldn't be antonyms.

One more time, making a claim does not require 100% assurance. Simply put, you are taking a position as to something. He claimed that throwing qbs to the wolves ruins them more often then not. It doesn't matter if it was his opinion, it was still a claim made by him in which he took a position. It doesn't matter what he prefaced the sentence with, he still made an affirmative statement without supporting evidence. Just as I would be if I said, it seems to me that Peyton Manning is the greatest QB of all time. While it is my opinion, I am still asserting an affirmative matter, despite what I decide to preface the sentence with.

Are you having fun yet?

 

[BearsJR]

Didn't read the whole thread, so sorry if it was already brought up. Just saw that 3 of the 4 remaining, excluding Manning, we're drafted by MLB. Pretty cool I think.

 

[EDUB316]

EDUMB too


Sent from my toilet using Tapatalk - now Free

proof I am against drafting a qb at all? thought so *****

 

[Jester]

are not first round picks. They are 2nd, 3rd and 6th round picks. And outside of Peyton, look at all the highest drafted QBs this weekend ...

Luck (#1 overall) - beaten by 6th round pick
Newton (#1 overall) - beaten by 2nd round pick

Even Brees, who himself was not a #1 pick but is an elite QB, was beaten by a team with a 3rd round pick.

But #14 overall in the first round isn't high enough to get a QB you can win with?

Again, pretty simple minded to imply these QBs are winning games on their own. Of course a talented QB can be picked up in later rounds if scouts know what they are doing and with a little luck. We all know the Tom Brady story.

[video=youtube;U2YYrGrYynw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2YYrGrYynw[/video]

 

[Jester]

Scouting combine Brady was TERRIBLE !!!

[video=youtube;b-LYiGZJ6lQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-LYiGZJ6lQ[/video]

 

[cobbland]

3 of the 4 teams left have defensive minded head coaches: John Fox with the Broncos, Belichick with the Patriots, and Pete Carroll with the Seahawks.

:tiptoe:

*Strap on load bearing vest*

 

[Giant Panda]

We know the next great bears savior can be found as a late round pick or a free agent. Hanie and Matt Blanchard are living proof.

Sorry get used to 7 years of Jay Cutler loser!

 

[Warrior Spirit]

We know the next great bears savior can be found as a late round pick or a free agent. Hanie and Matt Blanchard are living proof.

Sorry get used to 7 years of Jay Cutler loser!

What the Giant Panda here obviously cannot fathom is Hanie and Blanchard were never meant to be starting QBs. You'd have much better luck finding a starting QB if you actually looked for one.