syhuang

Then why based on any incorrect data to make claims? You are welcome to express your opinions, but using incorrect data to back your arguments is simply stupid.

It is because you're too stubord to to accept simple facts and prefer to use mock drafts in your arguments.

No, we have to base on right data. As I said, none of the mock drafts is written by real football scouts or based on real draft boards.

You finally understand the risk of trading down and realize using mock draft is stupid to justify draft picks

Consensus doesn't mean correctness, this is the second time I tell you this. NFL draft is not a beauty contest, consensus means nothing.

On which pick Whitner would be available as well as the risk of trading down.

No, not because you looked at some mock drafts, it's that you based on mock drafts to justify draft picks.

No problem. As long as your posts can keep people smiling like good jokes.

No, what you did wrong is to use merely Six mock drafts to claim Whitner would be drafted after #15. Now, you seem to understand that using mock drafts to justify real draft picks is stupid and keep quiet.

See, you still don't understand it by using mock drafts in your arguments. No, no one just simply accepted what other said. People have their own judgement. Some people are smart enought not to base on mock drafts to justify real draft picks.

It's better than what you did. My claim has been proved, but yours don't. No problem, I didn't take any of your posts seriously and just treat them as jokes. And you don't have anything to say about using mock drafts to compare NFL draft to America Idiol? See, an instance example to show your point is a joke.

Did you prove any of your points? My point has been proved by others. And your claim is wrong. Consensus doesn't mean correctness. None of the mock drafts was done by real football scouts or based on real draft boards. In other words, it's just unprofessional opinions. Do you think NFL draft is a beauty contest or America Idiol where consensus is important?

I claimed there're more than one mock draft have Whitner at #8, how many links of mock drafts were listed in this thread to confirm it? refute? How many mock drafts did you go through? Six (see your previous post). Just SIX!! And you think you know how to google. What's the pont to use few mock drafts to make any conclusion? and what the hell do you use mock draft to justify real draft picks? Is any of them based on the real draft boards?

It seems like you still don't understand it after several explanations. It's not that hard, you'll understand it eventually.

Do you save all the links to the mock drafts you ever saw? Is it so hard to learn how to use google? Also, what's the point to use mock drafts to justify the picks? is any of the mock drafts written by real pro-football scouts? Do they really have access to the draft boards of all teams?

There're more than one mock draft having Whitner at #8, do more "googling" and you'll find more.

How do you know Whitner would still be available at either 11 or 15? None of the TSW members were at the war rooms and had no idea what'd happen. This is all about the "risk" and Marv & co decided to take less risk to draft a player they really like.

interesting, most of the mock drafts I saw had Bush went to #1 overall. Aslo , it seems like you miss the mock drafts which had Whiter at #8.

Oh, it's a joke, my bad.

Whitner is cocky?

Damn, I was hoping Marcus could be the new distraction of Dolphins and also tutored by Ricky.

I know, I have no problem with the draft. But many TSW members do.

Based on past threads, I am expecting the replies to argue which rounds the O-linemans were drafted. Any takers? JSP?

Exactly, tampa 2 doesn't need 350 cloggers. The DTs in Bucs depth chart are McFarland (6-0, 300), Hovan (6-2, 296), Bradley (6-0, 301), and Wyms (6-3, 290). Bears: Harris (6-3, 300), I.Scott (6-3, 302), T.Johnson (6-3, 300), and Boone (6-4, 318). Colts: Simon (6-2, 293), Reagor (6-3, 285), Reid (6-2, 288), and Williams (6-3, 285). Among the three, only Bears drafted a DT this year, Dvoracek (6-3, 298). Thus, stop worrying about our DTs' sizes. We're fine.