I'm not entirely sure I buy that. I do think their thought process when they traded down to 54 was that they'd probably be able to get Cook there and still get one of the WRs they liked at 62, but I think you could've replaced Moore with Pickens or Pierce in that interview and it may have sounded the same.
I just don't see how they could've had confidence they'd be able to get Moore in particular at that point unless they knew the Pats, Colts, and Steelers favored their guys over him.
But I do think they felt there were quality receivers to be had. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
I'm not entirely sure I buy that. I do think their thought process when they traded down to 54 was that they'd probably be able to get Cook there and still get one of the WRs they liked at 62, but I think you could've replaced Moore with Pickens or Pierce in that interview and it may have sounded the same.
I just don't see how they could've had confidence they'd be able to get Moore in particular at that point unless they knew the Pats, Colts, and Steelers favored their guys over him.
But I do think they felt there were quality receivers to be had.
I'm guessing the recievers all graded really closely to each other, and could have been beneficial in the long run. I do think theres a good chance Skyy was at least their second favorite. The Colts have a recent track record of fucking up at WR. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
I'm not entirely sure I buy that. I do think their thought process when they traded down to 54 was that they'd probably be able to get Cook there and still get one of the WRs they liked at 62, but I think you could've replaced Moore with Pickens or Pierce in that interview and it may have sounded the same.
I just don't see how they could've had confidence they'd be able to get Moore in particular at that point unless they knew the Pats, Colts, and Steelers favored their guys over him.
But I do think they felt there were quality receivers to be had.
Yeah, I was trying to articulate the same thought.
I think they had those 3 WR's similar and were probably ok with whichever. If they really were set on Moore, they didn't play it very well to assure they had him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by penguinz:
Every one of these that he posts he shows more and more how football ignorant he is.
Or maybe he's a trolling attention whore and you guys fall for it. Every. Single. Time. Damn near every TC thread had been this same shit. Just stop responding to him guys. It's not that hard. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
I'm not entirely sure I buy that. I do think their thought process when they traded down to 54 was that they'd probably be able to get Cook there and still get one of the WRs they liked at 62, but I think you could've replaced Moore with Pickens or Pierce in that interview and it may have sounded the same.
I just don't see how they could've had confidence they'd be able to get Moore in particular at that point unless they knew the Pats, Colts, and Steelers favored their guys over him.
But I do think they felt there were quality receivers to be had.
I agree.... I have never bought that they Moore was their guy and they felt like he could have him by trading down 4 spots. I think everybody assumed we were taking a wideout at 50 - then when we moved back - it pushed everybody to start the run on 2nd round wideouts. Gun to head if all them were available - I think we would have taken Pickens, but we'll never know. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
Or maybe he's a trolling attention whore and you guys fall for it. Every. Single. Time. Damn near every TC thread had been this same shit. Just stop responding to him guys. It's not that hard.
You are somewhat correct with this. The problem is if he isn't called out for his bullshit then new members, or those who just don't pay that much attention, will see his nonsense and think it is a legit take.
Those of us that have been around here for several years know his only motivation is "Hey everyone! Look at me!" [Reply]