2023 Draft - Bears Edition

[BearsWillWin]

the coach is responsible for the wins and losses. Assuming Poles drafted well,

Assuming you can read, and it's doubtful at this point, please read the words not bolded. Sound them out. Ask mommy for help.

 

[BearsWillWin]

You just don't have the ability to put 2 and 2 together is the problem here.

2 and 2 is 4.

You are a back pedaling moron.

 

[BearsWillWin]

No shit sherlock. Because you actually have to draft well with that pick to have a better team. SHOCKER!

Again, higher chance does not equal guarantee. You simply cannot grasp this concept. No one is saying a higher pick AUTOMATICALLY means you'll get the best player. In fact nobody has ever said that, EVER. But you so badly want me to have said that. But alas i did not.

The problem is I'm not accusing you of saying it.

The problem is you ranking perceived value ahead of on field results.

One matters, one doesn't.

 

[BearsWillWin]

Grasping at unattainable straws.

 

[BearsWillWin]

Tank!

But that's never really a recipe for future success.

Tank!

No team that purposely tanks has ever won a SB.

Tank!

But we've already lost 9 in a row. Why you screaming?

Tank!

The season is over and we have the #1 pick.

Tank!

Seriously, why you screaming?

Tank!

The draft is over.

Tank!


The Bears could be competing in the playoffs and you're still gonna lament the days they had the #11 pick instead of #1.

 

[BsGenius]

Assuming you can read, and it's doubtful at this point, please read the words not bolded. Sound them out. Ask mommy for help.

OMG you're hopeless. This is what happens when you quote individual sentences from a paragraph--mass confusion.

2 and 2 is 4.

You are a back pedaling moron.

2 and 2 is 4 but I'm backpedaling? Taking things literally is backpedaling.

The problem is you ranking perceived value ahead of on field results.

This goes way to back to my original tank posts. You've been confused ever
since on what the exact purpose tanking is. And you still are. Dumb and dumber.

Grasping at unattainable straws.

Backpedaling alert.

LOL you have no answer for this:

Poles: We traded a 7th round pick for a 1st round pick!
Grey pubes: Great trade A+
(Poles drafts a bust with that 1st round pick)
Grey pubes: That was a very bad trade, i'm changing that grade to an F!
Genius: Umm those are two separate things and should be graded separately. Also then why isn't the Claypool trade an F?
Grey pubes: Umm because you have to give Claypool another uhh because i said so otherwise I look like an idiot. Posts a picture gif

 

[nebearsfan70]

Another thread hijacked.

 

[BsGenius]

Another thread hijacked.

This thread was already dead, I just revived it. You're welcome.

 

[BearsWillWin]

OMG you're hopeless. This is what happens when you quote individual sentences from a paragraph--mass confusion.

This is what happens when you're cornered and can no long reply to the argument so you deflect.

2 and 2 is 4 but I'm backpedaling? Taking things literally is backpedaling.

You went from the coach, not the GM, is responsible for wins and losses to of course the GM is responsible.

That's backpedaling.

This goes way to back to my original tank posts. You've been confused ever
since on what the exact purpose tanking is. And you still are. Dumb and dumber.

Tank tank tank tank. That's all you can say.

Yet tank tank tank tank is not a proven method of building future success in the NFL. None of the teams that have recently won a SB had to tank to get there.

So yeah....perception says #1 pick is more valuable than the #2. But reality says it doesn't matter.

You want to ignore reality.

Poles: We traded a 7th round pick for a 1st round pick!
Grey pubes: Great trade A+
(Poles drafts a bust with that 1st round pick)
Grey pubes: That was a very bad trade, i'm changing that grade to an F!
Genius: Umm those are two separate things and should be graded separately. Also then why isn't the Claypool trade an F?
Grey pubes: Umm because you have to give Claypool another uhh because i said so otherwise I look like an idiot. Posts a picture gif

Grades are fluid.

Many teams received A's for their draft last week. How many of those will still be A's four years from now?

The Seahawks got a D the year they drafted Russell Wilson. That's the same year they drafted Bruce Irvin and Bobby Wagner. They got grades of C and D from most outlets. Grade it now. It's an A.

Grades are fluid.

But also I'm arguing with a guy that used a what if the player dies defense. So I guess I need to consider the source.

 

[BearsWillWin]

Another thread hijacked.

1. It's a discussion about the draft in a draft thread.

2. If you don't like it....don't fucking read it.

 

[BsGenius]

This is what happens when you're cornered and can no long reply to the argument so you deflect.

2 separate posts i had conditionals in there. If you can't put 2 and 2 together and figure it out, that's not my problem.

You went from the coach, not the GM, is responsible for wins and losses to of course the GM is responsible.

That's backpedaling.

Nope. Wrong again. GM is indirectly responsible for wins and losses too. If you want to be technical, there's a whole lotta people also responsible for wins and losses too, not just the GM and coach. But knowing this would require you again, putting 2 and 2 together.

Yet tank tank tank tank is not a proven method of building future success in the NFL. None of the teams that have recently won a SB had to tank to get there.

Never said otherwise. See, you still don't get it.

Many teams received A's for their draft last week. How many of those will still be A's four years from now?

The Seahawks got a D the year they drafted Russell Wilson. That's the same year they drafted Bruce Irvin and Bobby Wagner. They got grades of C and D from most outlets. Grade it now. It's an A.

What?

We're talking about grading a GM on a trade involving picks and then grading him on the outcome of those picks. What you're talking about above is grading a GM on draft picks. You're lost again old guy.

Poles: We traded a 7th round pick for a 1st round pick!
Grey pubes: Great trade A+
(Poles drafts a bust with that 1st round pick)
Grey pubes: That was a very bad trade, i'm changing that grade to an F!
Genius: Umm those are two separate things and should be graded separately. Also then why isn't the Claypool trade an F?
Grey pubes: Umm because you have to give Claypool another uhh because i said so otherwise I look like an idiot. Posts a picture gif

 

[BearsWillWin]

2 separate posts i had conditionals in there. If you can't put 2 and 2 together and figure it out, that's not my problem.

Only you didn’t. You backpedaled and created “conditionals” after the fact. The original posts are still here. Kinda silly to lie about them.

Nope. Wrong again. GM is indirectly responsible for wins and losses too. If you want to be technical, there's a whole lotta people also responsible for wins and losses too, not just the GM and coach. But knowing this would require you again, putting 2 and 2 together.

I said GMs are responsible and your exact response was…..bullshit.

Backpedal all you want. Your initial response is all that matters now.

We're talking about grading a GM on a trade involving picks and then grading him on the outcome of those picks. What you're talking about above is grading a GM on draft picks. You're lost again old guy.

Lol…..any transaction can be graded now and graded later. Because grades are fluid in sports.

There are times when a trade is made and analysts say this team won the trade or that team did. Fast forward a few seasons and in hindsight the exact opposite could be true.

The initial grade is most often not the final grade.

Fluidity.

 

[nebearsfan70]

This thread was already dead, I just revived it. You're welcome.

Sure. Sure.

 

[nebearsfan70]

1. It's a discussion about the draft in a draft thread.

2. If you don't like it....don't fucking read it.

With you two dildos going at each other all the time, it makes the Bears' board a joke.

You asshats make it unreadable.

 

[BearsWillWin]

With you two dildos going at each other all the time, it makes the Bears' board a joke

This is the same board where one guy once said that the Bears purposely didn’t use Allen Robinson in a critical game against the Packers because they wanted to see what life the following year without him would be like.

Where multiple people thought Javon Wims could potentially be a #1 WR.

Where one moron thinks Justin Fields having earrings is a slippery slope to crossdressing.

Sorry to tell you bud….it’s already a fucking joke here.

You asshats make it unreadable

Like I said then….don’t fucking read it.

 

[BsGenius]

Only you didn’t. You backpedaled and created “conditionals” after the fact. The original posts are still here. Kinda silly to lie about them.

I posted two things i said when all this started and both had conditionals. Go back and re-read them if you have to

I said GMs are responsible and your exact response was…..bullshit.

Learn to put 2 and 2 together by reading and understanding whole paragraphs not pulling phrases out of paragraphs thereby losing context. Go back to school

Lol…..any transaction can be graded now and graded later. Because grades are fluid in sports.

There are times when a trade is made and analysts say this team won the trade or that team did. Fast forward a few seasons and in hindsight the exact opposite could be true.

Omg, it's like the 2 pages of conversation we had didn't happen. Nothing sticks in your head. A trade and a draft pick are two separate things, this is not rocket science.

This still perfectly illustrates why your original theory sucks to which you have no answer for. You're just old and stubborn and can't admit when you are dead wrong. Your games are getting old

Poles: We traded a 7th round pick for a 1st round pick!
Grey pubes: Great trade A+
(Poles drafts a bust with that 1st round pick)
Grey pubes: That was a very bad trade, i'm changing that grade to an F!
Genius: Umm those are two separate things and should be graded separately. Also then why isn't the Claypool trade an F?
Grey pubes: Umm because you have to give Claypool another uhh because i said so otherwise I look like an idiot. Posts a picture gif

 

[BsGenius]

This is the same board where one guy once said that the Bears purposely didn’t use Allen Robinson in a critical game against the Packers because they wanted to see what life the following year without him would be like.

Where multiple people thought Javon Wims could potentially be a #1 WR.

Where one moron thinks Justin Fields having earrings is a slippery slope to crossdressing.

Sorry to tell you bud….it’s already a fucking joke here.

Every board has dumb comments. Why are you even here if it's a joke? One idiot in here wanted to bet real money with me the Bears will finish top 5 in sacks--they finished last. And 40% of the personnel this guy predicted would contribute to all those sacks were released...lol I mean dumb do you have to be?

 

[BearsWillWin]

I posted two things i said when all this started and both had conditionals. Go back and re-read them if you have to

You backpedaled.

earn to put 2 and 2 together by reading and understanding whole paragraphs not pulling phrases out of paragraphs thereby losing context. Go back to school

Repeating yourself over and over again will never chance your original words.

Omg, it's like the 2 pages of conversation we had didn't happen. Nothing sticks in your head. A trade and a draft pick are two separate things, this is not rocket science

Any transaction can be graded now and graded later. Trade. Draft pick. Free agent signed. Coach signing. Anything. When it happens you can grade it. Then you can look back a year, two years, three years, or more and regrade it based on results.

Not sure what you’re complaining about. Sorry that logic and reality offend you. Not sure how to help you on this one.

 

[BearsWillWin]

Every board has dumb comments. Why are you even here if it's a joke? One idiot in here wanted to bet real money with me the Bears will finish top 5 in sacks--they finished last. And 40% of the personnel this guy predicted would contribute to all those sacks were released...lol I mean dumb do you have to be?

There’s a guy here that thought moving Khalil Mack inside meant he’d be a DT. And the same guy once called a throw down the field a checkdown and even defended saying it.

There are just idiots everywhere.

 

[BsGenius]

There’s a guy here that thought moving Khalil Mack inside meant he’d be a DT. And the same guy once called a throw down the field a checkdown and even defended saying it.

There are just idiots everywhere.

So why not leave? If this place is a joke, why are you here? I certainly wouldn't stay at a place i thought was a joke.

I get it. You're really old and you really don't have anything else in life. Is that it?

(This is where you respond with something "witty" because you don't have an answer to valid questions)