|
||||||
|
Title: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comments Post by StegRock on Jun 17th, 2007, 9:33pm Okay, guys, here is the thread to put comments on. This very first post is where I will maintain the cumulative running list of picks! Enjoy, and let's have fun with it! First "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 1. RB LaDainian Tomlinson - Chargers 2. RB Steven Jackson - Rams 3. RB Larry Johnson - Chiefs 4. RB Travis Henry - Broncos 5. RB Frank Gore - 49ers 6. RB Shaun Alexander - Seahawks 7. RB Rudi Johnson - Bengals 8. RB Joseph Addai - Colts 9. QB Peyton Manning - Colts 10. RB Laurence Maroney - Patriots 11. QB Drew Brees - Saints 12. RB Reggie Bush - Saints 13. RB Clinton Portis - Redskins 14. RB Brian Westbrook - Eagles 15. RB Thomas Jones - Jets 16. RB Willie Parker - Steelers 17. WR Steve Smith - Panthers 18. RB Willis McGahee - Ravens 19. RB Deuce McAllister - Saints 20. QB Carson Palmer - Bengals 21. WR Chad Johnson - Bengals 22. WR Torry Holt - Rams 23. WR Reggie Wayne - Colts 24. QB Tom Brady - Patriots 25. WR Terrell Owens - Cowboys 26. WR Marvin Harrison - Colts 27. QB Vince Young - Titans 28. WR Marques Colston - Saints 29. RB Cedric Benson - Bears 30. RB Ronnie Brown - Dolphins 31. WR Roy Williams - Lions 32. WR Larry Fitzgerald - Cardinals 33. RB Edgerrin James - Cardinals 34. QB Marc Bulger - Rams 35. RB Marshawn Lynch - Bills 36. RB Brandon Jacobs - Giants 37. RB Ahman Green - Texans 38. RB Maurice Jones-Drew - Jaguars 39. QB Donovan McNabb - Eagles 40. RB Jamal Lewis - Browns 41. WR Javon Walker - Broncos 42. RB Marion Barber - Cowboys 43. WR Andre Johnson - Texans 44. RB Carnell "Cadillac" Williams - Buccaneers 45. RB Reuben Droughns - Giants 46. TE Antonio Gates - Chargers 47. WR Lee Evans - Bills 48. WR Donald Driver - Packers 49. WR Randy Moss - Patriots 50. QB Damon Huard - Chiefs 51. QB Tony Romo - Cowboys 52. WR Anquan Boldin - Cardinals 53. RB Adrian Peterson - Vikings 54. QB Matt Hasselbeck - Seahawks 55. RB Warrick Dunn - Falcons 56. RB DeAngelo Williams - Panthers 57. RB Kevin Jones - Lions 58. RB Fred Taylor - Jaguars 59. WR T.J. Houshmandzadeh - Bengals 60. WR Plaxico Burress - Giants 61. WR Hines Ward - Steelers 62. QB Jon Kitna - Lions 63. RB Julius Jones - Cowboys 64. QB Jay Cutler - Broncos 65. QB Philip Rivers - Chargers 66. QB Michael Vick - Falcons 67. WR Deion Branch - Seahawks 68. WR Mark Clayton - Ravens 69. WR Calvin Johnson - Lions 70. RB DeShaun Foster - Panthers 71. TE Todd Heap - Ravens 72. WR Laveranues Coles - Jets 73. RB Jerious Norwood - Falcons 74. QB Matt Leinart - Cardinals 75. WR Chris Chambers - Dolphins 76. QB Eli Manning - Giants 77. RB Chester Taylor - Vikings 78. WR Braylon Edwards - Browns 79. D/ST Baltimore Ravens 80. RB LaMont Jordan - Raiders 81. RB LenDale White - Titans 82. TE Tony Gonzalez - Chiefs 83. WR Reggie Brown - Eagles 84. QB Brett Favre - Packers 85. WR Darrell Jackson - 49ers 86. WR Jerricho Cotchery - Jets 87. TE Jeremy Shockey - Giants 88. D/ST New England Patriots 89. QB Alex Smith - 49ers 90. WR Donte Stallworth - Patriots 91. RB Vernand Morency - Packers 92. RB Mike Bell - Broncos 93. WR Joey Galloway - Buccaneers 94. TE Jason Witten - Cowboys 95. RB Anthony Thomas - Bills 96. D/ST Chicago Bears 97. RB Tatum Bell - Lions 98. QB J.P. Losman - Bills 99. WR Joe Horn - Falcons 100. TE Vernon Davis - 49ers 101. WR Santana Moss - Redskins 102. RB Ladell Betts - Redskins 103. PK Nate Kaeding - Chargers 104. RB Brandon Jackson - Packers 105. TE Alge Crumpler - Falcons 106. WR Terry Glenn - Cowboys 107. WR Anthony Gonzalez - Colts 108. D/ST San Diego Chargers 109. WR Bernard Berrian - Bears 110. RB Chris Henry - Titans 111. QB Ben Roethlisberger - Steelers 112. QB Chad Pennington - Jets 113. WR Vincent Jackson - Chargers 114. TE Kellen Winslow - Browns 115. RB Chris Brown - Titans 116. QB Jake Delhomme - Panthers 117. WR Sidney Rice - Vikings 118. QB Trent Green - Dolphins 119. WR Greg Jennings - Packers 120. WR Jerry Porter - Raiders |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 17th, 2007, 9:36pm Sorry to be so boring with the first pick... The "innovative" [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] stuff is comin', though... [smiley=hmmmm.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 17th, 2007, 11:32pm Well, that's that for "conventionality"... Time to let "the Gridiron" factor factor in!!! [smiley=yes.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 18th, 2007, 10:58am A concensus this year among my friends has Shaun Alexander slipping to 9th or 10th overall in the rankings. I personally believe he is still Top 5 for at least one more season. Next year the Addai's, Bush's, and Maroney's of the world will surpass him...but in '07...Shaun's gonna shine!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 18th, 2007, 11:04am on 06/18/07 at 10:58:39, MordecaiCourage wrote:
We need to drug test you at work!! [smiley=kb.gif] [smiley=texan.gif] But that's why I love people like you!! [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] The Addais, Bush's, Maroney's have already arrived!!! It's [smiley=money.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 18th, 2007, 2:50pm on 06/18/07 at 11:04:34, Larsen89 wrote:
Yes they have arrived...and in a keeper league I'd take all three above 'Zander. But.... my alcohol impaired Minnesota frozen brained Texas transplanted amigo...if I had to pick for this season only, I'd still go with my man Shaun. ;) It's gonna look something like this.............Alexander = 1850 all purpose yards, 19 TD's. Addai = 1700 yds, 15 TD's. Bush = 1750 yds, 13 TD's. Maroney = 1300 yds, 11 TD's. How's that for calling it...Ya' gotta have dem balls sonny boy!!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 18th, 2007, 3:20pm Steg, I don't think Henry's gonna be worth a top 5 or even 10 pick for that matter. Gutsy, thought provoking, provacative, and fun pick, absolutely. I personally think that your man love for Shanny and his perpensity (sp??) of making good RB's great ones is overrated and outdated! For as often as Denver has been great for RB's in the past..I look at what Shanny does before he "gets " his guy...which is RBBC!!! Shanny is a nut. I have been in the middle of trying to figure out his "flavor of the month" before...I just say "No thanks" to all of that nonsense. But..I do share your enthusiasm for Rudi. Seems like you and I were the only two guys around here who gave Rudi that love last pre-season as well as this pre-season. Rudi is consistent..not a sexy pick, but a guy who gets his points every week!! I Like it!! [smiley=thumbsup.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 18th, 2007, 4:09pm Agreed on the Henry comments, low 2nd or maybe high 3rd IMO. As for Alexander my fellow [smiley=fireman.gif], Addai and Bush will outgain Alexander in Total Yards [smiley=crystalball.gif] Alexander still a very good back however, but I'm going more upside than a player who may kill me...as the great yoda may say (hurt, they say he is still). As mentioned, that's why I would LOVE to see Henry and Alexander go, if I'm picking in the lower end of round 1. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 18th, 2007, 7:52pm You can satisfy some of the people some of the time... But, Steg can't satisfy anybody anytime... ;) Actually, that's what he strives for... ;D All he wants to do is "satisfy" himself... [smiley=yes.gif] ... [smiley=laugh.gif] And, well, to bring this back around to PG-rated content, I'm satisfied with making the cavalier pick of Henry at #4. ANYWAY, I'll be around here for the night (mainland time)... if any two bodies want to hang out with me, help me shake the rust off, and bang this thing out for a little while here tonight... [smiley=woohoo.gif] Let's do it!!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 18th, 2007, 9:29pm I really like Henry in the right system, I remember a couple of seasons ago when he was getting 100+ yards a game with (literally) a broken leg. As much as I like the guy (Henry) and the system he is in, I got him about where I had Rudi last year, top ten, not #4. Speaking of Rudi, top ten, probably like last year about 8th or 9th best. Frank Gore is the guy who perplexes me the most. I know he will be gone in the first round, I'm just not going to be the guy who picks him. That said, he is the real deal and I was wrong about his ability to produce last year. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 18th, 2007, 9:44pm As much as I hate to be the predictable guy who takes Peyton in the first round...there he goes! ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 18th, 2007, 11:07pm [offtopic]Guys, as long as I can keep up with this thing, I am going to maintain the message icons with the picks so that you guys can (continue to) identify which message icons go with which team... [smiley=bow.gif] Also, I just think it's lookin' pretty that way! [smiley=yes.gif][/offtopic] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 18th, 2007, 11:45pm Noticed the witty icon for the saints pick. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 19th, 2007, 3:29am Backatchya, Larsman... Bush before... Deuce, no less a handful of others. That's "very" cavalier. But, hey, I like to see the originality. That's what I want rankings on "the Gridiron" to be,... original that is, and I want us to dare to be different... within reason. Henry at 4 and Bush at 12 seem reasonable... and surely "original". [smiley=yes.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jun 19th, 2007, 2:45pm Everyone keeps ignoring Brian Westbrook... I can't believe he was still sitting there at #14. I remember taking heat last year when I listed him at #10 on my fantasy RB rankings: http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi?board=55;action=display;num=1155303535 In my money league at CBSsportsline, he finished #6 overall with standard (no ppr, where he would have been #4) performance scoring. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 19th, 2007, 5:30pm I have an opportunity to be hangin' here again today if any two bodies want to roll [smiley=rollin.gif] this sucker out... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 19th, 2007, 10:19pm You are cooorect sir, I keep forgetting that Westbrook netted 699 receiving yards (4TDs) to go along with his 1217 rushing yards (7 TDs). [smiley=doseofreality.gif] Probably 5th best totals as I see it. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 19th, 2007, 10:27pm Boy, oh, boy was that a close call between Deuce and... I couldn't resist the RB, though. I'm addicted to TB's... [smiley=bonghit.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 19th, 2007, 11:23pm Larsman, I love your enthusiasm and, yes, I've been waiting a couple nights now for a "couple" dudes to hang out with me here and bang this out. But, you jumped the gun. I'm sure, in part, you are being thoughtful to me. BUT, it's way too early for us to abandon the rules. We usually don't (have to) break the "wait for two guys" rule until very late, like pick 100 or something. I would say leave your pick #23 up (what the hell). But, let's try to stick with the set-up for as reasonably long as possible. [smiley=yes.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 19th, 2007, 11:26pm Yeah, oops... I knew that but I get a little [smiley=christmascheer.gif] this time of year and I can't help myself !!!! [smiley=cheers.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 19th, 2007, 11:29pm No biggie, Larsman... :D BUT, it's a shame we have to wait out someone else right now to get back in the sandbox and play... :-/ ... ;) (Actually, I got to head out for about 30 minutes in about 5 minutes. So, I hope someone gets in here and makes a quick pick so I can step up to the plate again and so can you.) [smiley=ontheclock.gif] ... [smiley=fingerscrossed.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 19th, 2007, 11:37pm F~*@, dude! I gotta roll, man. [smiley=cruisin.gif] I'll be back, actually, in about 45 minutes. That's going to be pretty late for many of you guys, though. ... Well, if anybody's hangin' then,... again, I'll be back! [smiley=terminator.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 20th, 2007, 12:30am [smiley=booya.gif] I came close to the TO pick, just could not pull the trigger on Trouble Only. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 20th, 2007, 1:40am on 06/20/07 at 00:30:32, cwhams wrote:
Yep, it's really hard for me to pick a guy like that too, but I think he's the next logical guy at that pick. There were a few other guys I tossed around...I actually typed another player's name in but deleted it and replaced it with T.O.!! I won't mention who it was but he may be have been a [smiley=bear.gif] , or was it a [smiley=horseshoe.gif]??? Can't remember...... ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jun 20th, 2007, 9:41am Wow... some very surprising picks already. I wish I could draft with some of you guys -- I'd feel very good following that draft! I took Cedric Benson at #29! He's got the whole load to carry by himself now, and he's the workhorse who's capable of doing it. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Head Linesman on Jun 20th, 2007, 9:45am Modified some posts to correct the draft number and added team icons. There were Two # 27 picks!! Careful now. ;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 20th, 2007, 6:42pm Calling it right here, right now!!! [smiley=drillsergeant.gif] [smiley=loudnclear.gif] Marshawn Lynch RB - Bills for ROY!!! As much as I'd love to see my [smiley=viking.gif] AP win it, I see a RBBC in Minny this year. Lynch will get the rock from day one and not give it back!!! 1200+ & 8tds,... put it on the board. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 20th, 2007, 6:45pm I like Benson at about #28, not any sooner and maybe later, but about right. I'd like to see what he can do in a full season as the featured back...hell, I'd just like to see him make it a full season healthy. [smiley=genie.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 20th, 2007, 9:22pm on 06/20/07 at 18:45:48, cwhams wrote:
[smiley=violin.gif] ... [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] on 06/20/07 at 18:42:47, Larsen89 wrote:
[smiley=yikes.gif] ... [smiley=hmmmm.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 20th, 2007, 11:17pm The Master rankings list in the initial post of this thread is current. [smiley=bow.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 21st, 2007, 12:59am M. Lynch the starter over the A-Train? :P That could happen, but if I were the Bills I'd be knock knock knocken at Corey Dillons door. He is better than both those guys on the short hall and could give Lynch a little time to develop...aka Maroney. Not a good situation for any back behind that offensive line, even with the addition of free agent linemen. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Head Linesman on Jun 21st, 2007, 10:46am Modified the list...pick's after pick #38 were labeled as 33 and 34....good job Larsman not following suit and recognizing you were 41!!! Once again be careful and pay attention. [smiley=chair.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 21st, 2007, 2:44pm Tom Coughlin overfeeds the ball to one tailback. This is still an offense built for a Tiki Barber-style back. That guy is Droughns, not Jacobs. Also, Droughns is cut more in the Coughlin "Fred Taylor/Tiki Barber" mold. Barring injury, I see Jacobs's role as remaining the same and Droughns replacing Barber. Frankly speaking, I've been thinking about taking Droughns every pick after my pick of McAllister. [smiley=shrug.gif] McAllister after Bush; Droughns after Jacobs... This is bargain city!!! [smiley=booya.gif] ... ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 21st, 2007, 3:05pm The Droughns pick is intriguing...I really don't see Brandon Jacobs holding up as an every down back, he runs very upright and gets the tar knocked out of him pretty often. On the other hand, I don't see Droughns as an every down back either...best they do a running back by committee if they want to make it through the season and that probably means Jacobs gets most of the TD's and more touches than last season. [smiley=wiseman.gif] Still, this could pan out to be bargain pick if the reasoning is correct or if Jacobs does go down. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 21st, 2007, 3:14pm 48 picks and counting and there are still alot of quality players out there that could easily be Top 50 any day of the week!! Exciting year coming!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 21st, 2007, 4:30pm on 06/19/07 at 23:23:54, StegRock wrote:
Ya know I was scrolling through the picks and just realized I myself jumped the gun at pick 15. [smiley=blush.gif] I suppose it was because my mind wasn't processing that there was only one pick made since my previous one almost 12 hours prior. At any rate, I surely did not biff because I was "in a hurry to jump in the fray". Nevertheless, you guys could,... should have called me out on it (appropriately and pleasantly, of course, like I did Larsman). [smiley=shrug.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 21st, 2007, 4:50pm Stegman, I noticed, but knew it was an honest error and figured you'd figure it out and you did. The difference here is that you openly acknowledge the minor error. I just bow in shame and go on. :-[ :-X :-[ |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 21st, 2007, 5:15pm [smiley=jawdroppin.gif] Huard!!! Wasn't exactly who I was thinking about when I was rounding out the Top 50 :o ...but hey...to each his own I guess. ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 21st, 2007, 7:10pm Randy Moss at #49!!! I love it!! [smiley=woohoo.gif] I tossed him around instead of Evans at #47 He'll always be my beloved [smiley=viking.gif] at heart and with his greatest moment of all time [smiley=moon.gif] Mesecher and the fudgepacker nation!!! ;D Huard???? [smiley=surrender.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 21st, 2007, 7:21pm on 06/21/07 at 17:15:54, MordecaiCourage wrote:
With Trent Green gone, look for very nice things from Damon Huard this season. With only eight starts last season the man passed for 1,684 yards and 11 TD's. Doubling that output makes him a top six QB. There were more conventional and safer picks, you are right about that. [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 21st, 2007, 7:58pm That may be all Huard gets this season, is 8 starts..... With ALOT of talk about Croyle, #50 :o way to early to gamble, IMO of course. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 21st, 2007, 9:05pm I'll be hangin' around for a while... [smiley=wave.gif] Anybody wanna come out and play... [smiley=havinablast.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jun 21st, 2007, 10:44pm on 06/21/07 at 19:58:28, Larsen89 wrote:
There's an awful lot of talk about Croyle getting the starting job from jump this year. Huard isn't a guy I would have gambled on this early, although he is a very nice sleeper QB (much) later on... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 21st, 2007, 10:54pm on 06/21/07 at 22:44:19, Philly wrote:
Well-stated. That's pretty much how I feel. I do, however, think that Huard will get the job over Croyle. He was just too good last year... during regular-season NFL games. Talk, at this point in the offseason, is much more about lighting fires under asses than anything else. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 22nd, 2007, 12:38am I used Huard alot in the Deuce last season and he pulled out some nice wins for me after Green went down...of course those wins put me out of the lottery this year. >:( |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 22nd, 2007, 12:54am on 06/21/07 at 19:10:29, Larsen89 wrote:
You are right about that...hurt me almost as much as when the Bills came back and beat my beloved Oilers!! [smiley=bawling.gif] or when that same Oiler team tossed out ole Bum!! [smiley=bawling.gif] or etc. etc. etc. [smiley=bawling.gif] [smiley=bawling.gif] [smiley=bawling.gif] Seems like there was alot of crying going on over my old team. Hmmmm [smiley=doh.gif] [smiley=frustrated.gif] [smiley=idontknow.gif] [smiley=stilldunno.gif] [smiley=stars.gif] [smiley=shootmyself.gif] [smiley=surrender.gif] [smiley=uh.gif] [smiley=RIP.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 22nd, 2007, 7:23am OK, after picking Huard at #50, who am I to talk about a stretch ?.?.? Still, Adrian Perterson picked while starter Chester Tayor is still on the boards ?.?.? Both backs are big punishing runners that take a licking and keep on ticking. Look for neither guy to be phenominal...they will share carries and try to stay healthy. :P |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 22nd, 2007, 7:47am I have a feeling Norwood is going to get a lot longer look this year, new coaching staff, younger, faster :-/ ... I wouldn't be surprised to see Dunn's carries plummet. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 22nd, 2007, 2:58pm I basically agree that Norwood is the tailback in that backfield with the better upswing and obviously longer future ahead of him. That said, not too long ago, Duckett was that guy. :-/ I just think that Dunn is still the safer bet in that backfield. I think he still has some juice left and, given his veteran status, his "bottom line" participation I think is more guaranteed/in stone than Norwood's. Also, the new regime wants to improve Vick qua quarterback, most notably his passing percentage. One of the prevalent ways to do that is to get your quarterback comfortable with the dump-off pass to a running back. I feel absolutely confident in saying that Dunn is the better candidate for that role over Norwood. I think Dunn is going to be catching a TON of passes this year... if things go as planned, which, admittedly, with Vick, we all know too well they very well may not. I agree, though, that the transition, if Norwood really is the real deal, a Jamal Anderson and not another Duckett (which remains to be seen, mind you), would probably (at least begin to) happen this season. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 22nd, 2007, 3:07pm on 06/22/07 at 07:23:02, cwhams wrote:
Sit back and enjoy the AP show....CT will be 2nd fiddle!! ;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 22nd, 2007, 3:54pm I must admit that I'm with C-dub here. I'm not too keen on that Peterson pick, either. [offtopic]Hows about a little useful and fun (once you think about it) English lesson? What's the difference in meaning and expression between the following (this is not very difficult, but the mistake is OFTEN made; in fact, though, its mundanity is what makes it interesting, to me at least)? "I'm not too keen on that Peterson pick, either." or "I'm not too keen on that Peterson pick, too." AND "I'm not too keen on that Peterson pick either." or "I'm not too keen on that Peterson pick too." Have at it, boyz!!! [smiley=thinking.gif][/offtopic] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 22nd, 2007, 6:00pm ::)We shall see boys :-* |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 22nd, 2007, 8:49pm Larsman???!!?? Kitna? What happened to your manlove for Rivers?? I thought you'd be there by now! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 22nd, 2007, 8:58pm I know it, I know it!!! ::) Kitna has me fascinated with the addition of Calvin Johnson, and the Martz's carousel attack...... Rivers,..... he'll be REAL soon!!!!! ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 22nd, 2007, 9:42pm Too as in also Two as in #2 or to, which is as it should be |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 22nd, 2007, 9:56pm [smiley=sinister.gif] OK, Michael Vick at #66 just one 6 away from 666, just could not help myself. Now we all know why the man runs so fast, if you had the hounds from hell chomping on your heels you'd run too [smiley=demon.gif] [smiley=hellhound.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 22nd, 2007, 10:07pm on 06/22/07 at 21:42:47, cwhams wrote:
If this is a response to my "English Lesson" question, I am almost certain it is not right... Explain... Or, "retake"... ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 22nd, 2007, 11:18pm on 06/22/07 at 15:54:31, StegRock wrote:
The preposition "too" has a number of meanings: Prior to "keen" the word "too" means overly. At the end of the sentence the word "too" means also. The pronoun "either" refers to one of a number...in this case Steg & C-dubs. :'( That is a short stab. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 22nd, 2007, 11:42pm Much better stab, C-dub... [smiley=yes.gif] First, a general note, don't get lost in the grammar (that's not to say not to know it; just don't get "stuck" in it, which dictionary categories can cause one to do)... Okay,... piece-by-piece... on 06/22/07 at 23:18:42, cwhams wrote:
Rethink that one, C-dub [even just in terms of what you (correctly) go on to write]! Quote:
YES! [smiley=thumbsup.gif] BUT, that's not what's at issue here. (Regarding what I said above, what kind of word is "too" functioning as here? A preposition??? Think!!!) Quote:
YES! [smiley=thumbsup.gif] You are on the right track (with the exception of your grammatical categorization of the word "either"),... BUT you are only halfway there... Think it through; bring it home, man!!! Here's a hint... Consider the difference in meaning and expression between the following two sentences... "I don't like that pick too." AND "I too don't like that pick." Which one of those is "I don't like that pick, too." (technically supposed to be/more so) equivalent to??? Then, consider the pattern in terms of "either". It's ALL ABOUT the comma!!! And, then, based on that, what does the "other" sentence mean/express??? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 23rd, 2007, 8:11am Personally, I'd lose the comma. It seems to work when you say "Have at it, boys". But the comma prior to either or too does not seem to work. ?.?.? I'm relatively sure there is some rule of grammar here. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 23rd, 2007, 5:45pm on 06/22/07 at 23:42:36, StegRock wrote:
Quote:
... Oh, no... We've regressed,... :'( and I am partly at fault. Honestly, I was a little bit too exuberant [smiley=havinablast.gif] about how close you were before. You were on the right track, but only about a quarter or third of the way there, not halfway. And, then, I go on putting the cart before the horse and go explaining about the "comma" and the "pattern". Moreover, I go about it bass-ackwards, intimating, at least, how the "pattern" and the placement of the "comma" can help you figure out the "second" meaning at play here. In doing so, I've committed one of the greatest sins a [smiley=wiseman.gif] philosopher [smiley=zenmaster.gif] can commit. I am (what we philosophers call) begging the question... because, in this case, knowing the "patterns" assumes knowing the "meanings", not the other way around. (I digress... See how even rather simple things can become knotty!) In my defense, I did this because I thought you were farther along than you were. I thought I just needed to give you a nudge, and I got sloppy. The fact is, you were still missing a huge part of the puzzle,... the "other" meaning. When you said that "either" (and "too") indicated "Steg and C-dubs", that was only half-right (and that's only half of the equation here and, thus, why I should have said something like you are a quarter of the way there, not halfway). Don't worry about the grammar books (right now). Grammar books will tell you that using extra commas is ultimately up to the discretion of the writer. But, in any event, the "comma" in writing and the "pause" and/or "intonation" in speaking are THE KEY to the differentiation of the TWO meanings at play here, which, C-dub, you have yet to hit on. Until you do, you are not going to "get it". You won't be in a position to. Once you get the other meaning, it'll be like... [smiley=gotanidea.gif] (and [smiley=doh.gif]) and, I'm fairly sure, it'll all fall into place. If/When you (can) think through (which, as opposed to memorization, is the key to really understanding and internalizing learnt material) what's going on here, you will come to better appreciate the grammatical mechanics behind it all, what is at issue here in terms of punctuation, and how it all makes sense (beyond being a set of rules). I digress... [smiley=zenmaster.gif] Think of it in terms of these three (Stegemanian ;)) levels of genuine learning (anything, not just grammar): at the most basic level, one knows and calls upon rules; at the next level, one knows why the rules are rules and how and how well they function in terms of accomplishing what they are supposed to; at the highest level, one sees the developmental process and evolution of the rules and becomes a creator of rules and shaper of rules structures. Be self-critical and consider the level at which you are relating to and processing circumstances being presented to you in life. Always seek to take it to the next level! [smiley=wiseman.gif] In any event, there's nothing "personal" about it. ;) Seriously, don't go there either, Dubs. Neither the grammar books nor your personal opinion is going to help you here. Toe the middle! Think it through! Forget about commas for the time being! Focus on the respective meanings of the TWO example sentences I gave you in the hint above, neither of which contains a comma! What are the TWO meanings at play? THEN, go from there. Answer the question that immediately follows the two example sentences. THEN, jump to the last question and answer it. You should be able to take it that far. I think it'll all fall into place in your head [smiley=thinking.gif] at that point. If not, WE'll pick it back up from there! [smiley=yes.gif] Trust me, friend... I've been "there" with all kinds of this stuff. Once I thought it through and "got it", it was like a revelation. Until then, it was just like trivia knowledge that I didn't get and (therefore) wanted to buck (with what I "personally" thought). Always seek to "get it"! [smiley=zenmaster.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Takamine305 on Jun 23rd, 2007, 6:34pm Not a huge surprise here from the Cardinal report!! How is it that Leinart's supporting cast of Fitz, Boldin, James are always ranked high while Leinart tends to go late...Isn't he getting them the ball?!?!? Oh well, I suppose as Steg puts it...They're still the Cardinals!! :D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 23rd, 2007, 7:21pm Master list in initial post up to the moment... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 23rd, 2007, 10:37pm What is yall's take on LaMont Jordan? Heck, while we're at it, what about the Raider running game altogether? I know I'd like to see Jordan get the load but is that gonna' happen? Anyway, if you get a starting RB at the #80 pick then IMHO you've got a bargain! But...does he start, and if he does how many carries with Rhodes and Fargas sitting back there? For how long, etc? Many questions??? ?.?.? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 23rd, 2007, 10:53pm Larsen, I like your Chambers pick at #75. I think he could've went a little higher. I thought about reeling him in in the 60's somewhere. I think he's gonna be revived with ole Trent throwing it to him. This is the kind of player that intrigues me. Gets a new QB and has mass potential. McMichael leaves for St. Louis and Trent has to throw it somewhere right? I think he will reel in 90+ this year, but does he score? I think so but I don't know!! [smiley=stilldunno.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 23rd, 2007, 11:02pm Dear Steg, For the love of God and all that is Holy under heaven, I just don't get the english lesson. [smiley=pumpkin.gif] ?.?.? :-[ Give me spread sheets, give me multi-million $ budgets, give me [smiley=titflash.gif], give me your poor, down trotten. These things I understand, wellllll alright, maybe I don't uderstand the women. I was thinking maybe a few of the other boys would have jumped in and helped the ole Dubs out of a jam, but nooooooooah, silence from the stands. ;D The answer is right there, like mushroom hunting, you just got to see it. Sincerely, The Dubber [smiley=slap.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 23rd, 2007, 11:18pm on 06/23/07 at 23:02:30, cwhams wrote:
Dear Dubs...it is summertime! School has been out for nearly a month now. I did not even think that hard during school, much less in the summer!! Summertime, in my day, was when a kid could download what he knew and just be a vegetable...play some baseball, throw some rocks, do some camping, catch some fish, ride a skateboard, etc. etc. Yep, I learned back in the 70's not to engage my brain after June 1st!! ;D By the way Dubs...and others who have not already done so......since I've recollected a bit from my past, it has reminded me of " the sidelines" and "GTKYG" series. How 'bout you mosey on down there and let us regular guys who know you by your posts, get to know who you are for real. http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi?board=58;action=display;num=1059537803 |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 24th, 2007, 12:05am Since you asked, MC,... don't much like the Jordan pick. I don't see it getting much better for that backfield (for most of) this upcoming season nor for Jordan in particular with Rhodes, Fargas and, the aforeUNmentioned, Michael Bush perhaps in the mix. Honestly, I'm not keen on my LenDale White pick (NO COMMA) either. But, at least for him, I see the situation as being set up perfectly for him to succeed. It's just a matter of whether he can overcome himself. That said, where we are at in this Huddle, neither Jordan nor White are "bad" picks. I'd probably rather have neither of them on my fantasy team, however, all things equal. I definitely would not want to be relying on either of them, and around we are here, depending on the size and starting lineup requirements of one's league, we're still picking up guys that may very well have to be relied on. So,... [smiley=shrug.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 24th, 2007, 12:25am OH,... and, by the way, I am a bit disappointed that you guys are giving up on learning, whether its summertime or not, and figuring this out. I'm VERY Confucian [smiley=bow.gif] about this. Go pick up a copy of the Analects and give 'er a read and see why/how so... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 24th, 2007, 2:49pm [smiley=buc.gif] Brett Favre at #84...that's a steal by any standard. :o |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jun 24th, 2007, 10:32pm on 06/24/07 at 00:25:52, StegRock wrote:
I am disappointed that you are a bit disappointed that a hard working [smiley=fireman.gif] like myself would rather kick back on my days off and catch some [smiley=sleepers.gif] than read a copy of the Analects, which by the way would probably end up causing me to catch those said [smiley=sleepers.gif] even quicker!! ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jun 25th, 2007, 9:16am on 06/22/07 at 15:54:31, StegRock wrote:
Well, since I was spending my weekend away from the computer (I'm in front of a monitor too much during the week) I didn't see this question until just now. I do not profess to be a grammarian, but I think I can see the difference between using a comma there and not using a comma. When you use the comma (e.g., I'm not too keen on that AP pick, either/too.), it directs that agreement with the opinion of another (in this case unstated) individual. When the comma is elided, it personalizes the comment and implicitly indicates agreement with your own previous comments. Sound good? (And there's no chance I'm picking up any Confucius for light summer reading.) [smiley=bow.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Takamine305 on Jun 26th, 2007, 4:41pm this IS still the fantasyfootballer site right?!? Just wondering what happened to all the football chatter in this comments thread!!! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 26th, 2007, 5:37pm on 06/25/07 at 09:16:32, Philly wrote:
I'm almost certain you've got it, Philster! [smiley=gotanidea.gif] The first is surely right. [smiley=bullseye.gif] Dubs doesn't like that Peterson pick. -> I don't like that Peterson pick, too. =/or I too don't like the Peterson pick. The latter two sentences are equivalent in meaning, viz., they express my (subsequent) agreement with Dubs. But, could you tease the second part (made bold in the quote above) out? Actually, it would almost definitely be easiest to show what you mean/what it means without the comma with an example like I just did above for the first part. on 06/24/07 at 22:32:43, MordecaiCourage wrote:
[smiley=gimmeabreak.gif] (Capitalism... Arrrrrgh!) on 06/25/07 at 09:16:32, Philly wrote:
[smiley=no.gif] I pose just one (perhaps best taken to be rhetorical) question... to you, MC. What if I said the same thing as regards the Bible? Now, I'm not saying there is not a reasonable comeback (albeit perhaps pretentious-ish), and I did notice that you included a "winky" smiley (;)) with your post. I'm just saying this to convey how your (and Jeff's) comments cause me to feel... :-/ Anyway,... it's "'all' a joke",... I know... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jun 26th, 2007, 11:00pm Sorry to ruffle your feathers [smiley=chicken.gif], Steve, but Confucius is in your wheelhouse, not mine. I have almost no interest in reading/exploring philosophy or religious precepts. It wasn't meant as a slight to you and I'm not sure why you're taking it that way. We all have different interests... |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 27th, 2007, 7:44am on 06/26/07 at 23:00:03, Philly wrote:
Because you made it a point to go out of your way and state your (negative) sentiments about my interests,... philosophy. I lay my heart out on my sleeve so as to let yous get to know me, and the thanks I get is... reminders that this stuff I am deeply invested (not just interested) in falls on deaf ears [while I am aware of the deeper subsistent, behind-the-scenes, under-the-surface reality at play here, namely, that you guys have come to love this place and I have developed it with very that philosophy, which so doesn't interest you guys, in heart, mind and spirit; it is part and parcel of why yous love the place to the degree yous do as well as hate it at times... whether you're (openly) (dis)interested or not]. Let's face it... I'm not stupid. I pretty much know that my "suggestion" above to read the Analects is, for all intents and purposes, rhetorical. No comment would have sufficed, or an innocuous or, maybe,... gasp,... deferential or, at least, kind-hearted response would have been pleasant. I guess that's not where we're at in America today. I know, as regards this kind of stuff, I don't do the same to people. Now, I may not have as much opportunity to, as you guys do me, because most people like to remain behind their highly-built walls. That's not my problem, though. Bottom line, if people we're more open about whence they were coming "interest"-wise/philosophically, I wouldn't make mere quips. Depending on what it is, I may be willing to counterposition myself, but then I'd do so rather thoroughly (as yous know all too well), and not just throw the jibe out there, and be willing to take it to the deeper levels necessary to show that I care both about the thing in question and the person's feelings about said thing. On the other hand, as is often the case, if I am not interested, I just pass it over. I surely don't make it a point to insert a disagreeable one(or so)-liner just for the hell of it that may make the guy feel bad (a dynamic made all the more poignant when said guy is the guy who runs the joint, moreover, in accordance with said philosophy that he takes very seriously). In any event, what did you mean by the following? Quote:
The word "precepts" is what's throwing me. A sub-text goes here, but I'll hold it back for the time being (not that it's very incendiary, but very thought-through and pointed). |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 27th, 2007, 7:47am Jeez!!! Are we gonna make it to 100??? [smiley=impatient.gif] I was hoping we'd make it to, at least, 120, which would equal 10 rounds for your run-of-the-mill 12-team league... [smiley=idontknow.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jun 27th, 2007, 9:13am Not a whole lot of thought went into using the word "precepts"... there's no subtext there for me, conscious or otherwise. I just used the word at its basest level, to mean ideas promoted by any of the religious groups on how people should act/live. It's not my area of study. As for the rest of it... I'll just proffer a "no comment" on this one. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 27th, 2007, 4:15pm on 06/27/07 at 09:13:25, Philly wrote:
Annnnnd,... [smiley=drummer.gif] let's commence 07's miscommunication festival (with readings in the worst possible light)!!! (Let's see if we can't head this off at the pass this year...) Granted, maybe this wasn't 100% clear, but here's what I wrote: Quote:
I thought it was fairly clear I was talking about myself. I'm not pretentiously attributing any subtext to your writing. I'm not going to put words in your mouth. If I were talking about you, what I've put in bold in the quote above would be pretentious beyond the pale. As regards the subtext behind what I'm writing,... let me throw this out there... "...if reason were to be fully true to itself, then it must respect certain basic rules. The first of these is that reason must realize that human knowledge is a journey which allows no rest." Any (quick) thoughts on that (Jeff)? Is it worth the while? Insightful? Inspirational? Pithy? Or, garbage? Bullshit? Stupid? Or, just nothing comes to mind,... next? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jun 27th, 2007, 9:02pm I realized that you were talking about your own subtexts--not mine. I just wanted you to realize that not a lot of thought went into my using that particular word. I'm not big into hiding things between the lines or adding a second layer of meaning to what I say. You'll notice that I referred specifically to myself and my thought process in my previous post. I thought my delivery of the message was succinct and clear, but I see it wasn't received the way I intended it to be. As you've noted, it's a flaw inherent to this medium. As for your quote... it's a good one. I'll just say that I'm fully embarked on that journey, but my route is decidedly different than yours. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 28th, 2007, 5:17pm "Decidedly different"... Huh? [smiley=stilldunno.gif] I'm not so sure about that, but if that's what you think... [smiley=shrug.gif] To elaborate my subtext... I know that the word "precept" can also mean something along the lines of a guide or teaching. But, when I hear it, I think rule, maxim, imperative, etc. In fact, that's how I would typically use it. The point being, in that latter sense of the word, and this is the point relevant here that I'm screaming out to the world, [smiley=soapboxer.gif] Confucius is NOT about precepts (as in rules, maxims or imperatives), Pope John Paul II/Karol Wojtyla is NOT about precepts, His Holiness The Dalai Lama/Tenzen Gyatso is NOT about precepts, Laozi and Zhuangzi are NOT about precepts, it is needless to say that Nietzsche, Marx, Heidegger, Sartre and that crew are NOT about precepts, but neither are Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius and the later Stoics. Phenomenology, Existentialism, Personalism, Classical Chinese Thought, and Tibetan Buddhist Philosophy are NOT about precepts. This is a big part of my point. Now, that's not to say that they have absolutely no precepts. Everybody, at a point, does. It's just that, contrary to what one might think (especially about guys like JPII and HHDL), their philosophical (and, to a large degree, even religious) outlooks are not about precepts. Now, if you are saying that you aren't into exploring precepts as in religious or philosophical "teachings", I'm at a loss because I don't know of any others... that matter... at the end of the day. Surely, when one lays one's head on the pillow at night or takes that hard look in the mirror, it should be neither the "teachings" nor maxims of, let's say, professional sports accounting that's running through his or her mind. BUT,... I digress... That quote above that you too appreciate is a precept... in that narrower sense of rule, maxim, imperative. And, though I wouldn't call it a religious precept per se, the fact of the matter is that it does appear in Church doctrine, the encyclical Fides et Ratio by none other than POPE JPII. But, rhetorically speaking, how does one, nay, how do you reconcile your indubitably right-headed appreciation of that quote with your declaration of indifference towards philosophical and/or religious writings and sayings. Ask yourself, "can one be 'fully embarked on that journey'" while having "no interest in reading/exploring philosophy or religious precepts"??? [smiley=idontknow.gif] I don't know. Maybe so. But, I would say don't (bother) answer(ing) me. Answer yourself. [smiley=thinking.gif] One last note, a reminder, "Philosophy" is never leaving this place. It is what I do, what I love, what pushes me to press on in ventures like this, what guides me in my running of and vision for this place, and, frankly speaking, it is what has given me the critical, creative and logical thinking skills to acquire the computer skills that allow this place to even exist, and incorporating my two loves of Fantasy Football and Philosophy is what makes this place worth the fight for me. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jun 28th, 2007, 9:29pm Reggie Brown was picked by me at #83 [smiley=shrug.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 28th, 2007, 11:09pm on 06/28/07 at 21:29:52, Larsen89 wrote:
It's been removed... I say to get this thing to 100 or, preferably, as I stated above, 120, we go ahead and break the "wait for two guys to pick before picking again" rule and just get a move on here. [smiley=onit.gif] ... [smiley=yes.gif] Let's do it, boyz!!! [smiley=ontheclock.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 28th, 2007, 11:45pm [smiley=awwgee.gif] Sorry about the Reggie pick...just missed it. [smiley=zombie.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jun 29th, 2007, 4:37pm The Master rankings list in the initial post has been updated through pick 102. As I had said, I'd like to get this thing to, at least, pick 120, fellas, as that equals 10 rounds for your run-of-the-mill 12-team league. Remember, at this point, you can go every other person. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jun 30th, 2007, 9:35pm I guess I'm about the only person that likes kickers and defense? About time to draft a few kickers maybe? The top four defenses are gone. But unless I'm missing something Kaeding is the only kicker gone. Realistically, 114 picks in, I think most leagues would have probably at least three kickers to go along with the four D's. ?.?.? But who am I anyway, there are still some nice picks left in several categories. [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 1st, 2007, 1:32am on 06/30/07 at 21:35:35, cwhams wrote:
D/ST's, yes... Place-kickers, no... We're in the tenth round of your run-of-the-mill 12-team draft. Of course, this is contingent on the roster size of the teams, but I don't see many, if any, kickers going in the first ten rounds. [smiley=idontknow.gif] That said, Marques Tuiasosopo in the 15th round was a WAY worse pick than Neil Rackers in the 6th in last year's CBFL draft. ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jul 1st, 2007, 9:20am on 07/01/07 at 01:32:10, StegRock wrote:
I agree, just not a whole lot worse. That said, the guy projected to finish a very distant last, was just a few points shy of 4th...wait till next year! ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jul 1st, 2007, 9:30am Delhomme could be controversial with Carr in the mix. Still, the boy missed three starts with a bad thumb and went without Steve Smith the first two games of the season...still had multiple TDs in 5 of his last 8 starts. I'm thinking he's still the guy until proven otherwise. [smiley=doseofreality.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Larsen89 on Jul 1st, 2007, 12:49pm My #117, I had to show some [smiley=smitten.gif] to my beloved [smiley=viking.gif]'s . [smiley=blush.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 1st, 2007, 1:25pm At 118, Trent Green could be a steal in the draft. There are enough tools there for him to be really effective. If he can stay healthy, and Ronnie Brown has a resurgence...look out! Watch the Fins add at least 3 games to their win column in '07! ;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 1st, 2007, 6:55pm This is the negative side of announcing a pick limit beforehand... on 07/01/07 at 12:49:48, Larsen89 wrote:
Well, Larsman, we're going to have a disagreement again, I fear. If you wanted to make a token pick at this point and take one of your beloved Vikings, why not go with Troy Williamson? Besides having fun (I guess that was fun), I'm working my ass off to make this site a useful resource that will attract people. This (kind of) pick only serves to discredit our rankings list here that we put good effort into putting together to anybody looking in and sniffing around. Look,... don't get me wrong! This is not a huge deal. But, how a product is made GREAT is attention to detail. That is a concern of mine as owner and operator of the site. I don't know if I can call any rankings as of July 1st, 2007 "great" that has the, currently at best, #3 wideout on a team with somewhat of a mess at quarterback listed in the Top 120 when the #'s 1 and 2 wideouts didn't even make the list. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 1st, 2007, 7:00pm Thank you all for participating. [smiley=bow.gif] Also, if it happened to be intentional, I appreciated you guys' leaving me the last pick. That was nice! The Master list in the initial post of this thread is complete. [smiley=builder.gif] 12 teams, 10 rounds, we got 'em there! I look forward to our second "Huddle" of 2007. [smiley=huddle.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 2nd, 2007, 11:14pm Just to wrap this English lesson up... on 06/26/07 at 17:37:08, StegRock wrote:
The "other" meaning, the one when the comma is elided, as I think Jeff was saying, would run something like this... I don't like that Peterson pick. -> I don't like that LenDale White pick too. OR (to bring this around full-circle) I don't like that LenDale White pick either. Here, instead of indicating agreement with another person, what is being conveyed is a list (of things in relation). NOTICE there is NO comma there between "pick" and "too" (or "either"). That is because "too" (or "either") goes with "pick" [the (direct) object]. In the other case (I too don't like the Peterson pick./I don't like the Peterson pick, too./I don't like the Peterson pick, either.), "too" (or "either") goes with "I" (the subject). That is why a comma isn't required between "I" and "too", but IS required between "pick" and "too" (or "either"). Got it...??? :) Also, just to get the grammar straight here, "goes with" (which I use in my explanations above) is not grammatical terminology. "Modify" is. Strictly speaking, "too" is functioning as, in fact, basically exclusively functions as an adverb (of degree) (I cannot off the top of my head think of its having any other grammatical function). Adverbs don't modify nouns or pronouns (like "pick" or "I"). In the sentence "I don't like that LenDale White pick too.", strictly speaking, "too" is modifying the (object) verb phrase "don't like that LenDale White pick", whereas, in the sentence "I too don't like that Peterson pick." or "I don't like that Peterson pick, too.", "too" is modifying the (subject) verb phrase "I don't like". ... The same would stand if we plugged "either", which is also (almost exclusively used as) an adverb, in. Incidentally, why "either" cannot immediately follow the subject, in the case above "I", is just a matter of vocabulary usage. I would guess that it relates to its other "conjunctive" usage (as in "either/or"). ... My dad always said, "Make sure to learn something new every day." [smiley=wiseman.gif] ... I knew you guys weren't sleeping well at night not having this hammered [smiley=hammer.gif] out... ;) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Philly on Jul 3rd, 2007, 8:45am One of the great things about grammar (and one of the most frustrating things in my line of work) is that language functions as a living entity, always changing. There are very few hard and fast rules about grammar as evidenced by disagreement among the so-called experts (Chicago, Gregg, MLA, etc.) in the field. With the advent and proliferation of electronic media, those rules change quickly. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 3rd, 2007, 4:26pm That said, though language surely does evolve, a) the vast majority of things won't evolve during a lifetime or two, b) the "big" things don't change for 100's or even 1000's of years at a time, and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, c) things grammatical, at any given moment, still make sense if thought through. To say that language evolves is not to say that the evolution of language is haphazard. (This is why "forced" grammatical moves/systems like Ebonics, with its demand to end verb conjugation, or languages like Esperanto don't go anywhere, at least not for a very long time and usually not ever.) If you think it through, like we have here with "too" and "either", there is a sense to it. It's not magic. Now, where there is disagreement in the reasoning about the grammar, no less reasoning that causes the "experts" to differ on what they think is correct or incorrect grammar, I get Nietzschean about it. I say go with the interpretation/argument that is the most well-reasoned. I mean... since the process of grammar is one of evolution, "rules" per se are not going to be the key characteristic feature of grammar. As such, it's best not to adopt grammatical "dogma", i.e. accept rules based on "authority" alone, without explanation. Mind you, that's not to say that it cannot be explained. Just try to do so yourself or find someone who can or, at least, can help you to. That's what I did (in the discussion) above. Whether or not you care about English grammar, this is your language, and this stuff is great brain exercise... that I think has a great payoff, namely keeping the mind sharp, especially as we all progress on into old age. Trivia knowledge, like that in crossword puzzles and on game shows, doesn't get the job done, doesn't get the synapses firing. (I actually have a theory about Alzeimer's and America, and it deals with academic laziness.) ... All this said as I get ready to head out to teach my first ESL/EFL class in almost five years. To bring "yous" (if "yous" haven't noticed, I'm pushing that modification of the second-person plural pronoun; hopefully it will catch on... 200 years from now ;)) up to date, the first job I've procured for myself here in the immediacy (of this tender, what is likely to be, long transitional period) is a General English class at Kaplan. Good bang for the buck, but I still need full-time work. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jul 4th, 2007, 10:05am Language...grammar...speech...really it is all about commnication. Over thinking...over writing...over talking...in most cases does not convey good communication to the vast majority of society. There is a place for deeper thought...writings...and speeches in the formulation of a philosophy. But to garner interest in that philosophy and perpetuate its existence a person must learn to communicate succinctly, perhaps even charismatically. Whether you are a student of literature or a Christian, the Bible may be a good example of great communication. It is so simple a child can understand, yet so deep that a philosopher will grapple a life time to understand. [smiley=footballsmiley.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 4th, 2007, 1:27pm on 07/04/07 at 10:05:41, cwhams wrote:
Here...Here ! I agree Ham [smiley=thumbsup.gif] but......this thread has taken a turn towards belonging over on the Sidelines I think....Stegger??? [smiley=idontknow.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 4th, 2007, 6:31pm on 07/04/07 at 10:05:41, cwhams wrote:
MC may like this. I'm not getting much out of it... Vis-a-vis what I wrote here... on 06/28/07 at 17:17:35, StegRock wrote:
...I don't know what you're trying to accomplish, man. But, I know what you have accomplished. [smiley=clap.gif] I know I'm not at all taking to it kindly, "it" being what I'm taking to be the insinuation, at least, that this is not the place for (my) expressions of deep philosophical thought and that I don't present things sufficiently succinctly or charismatically (mind you, there is nothing succinct or necessarily charistmatic about Plato, Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, and the list GOES ON; included in the list of modern-day succinct, charismatic communicators of their philosophies are Jim Jones, David Karesh, Charles Manson, and the list GOES ON). I have no interest in living my life, which includes very much so running this web site, based on (what is, at least, tantamount to) bumper-sticker slogans. This is all very consistent with my distaste for "one-liners" (one-line responses), especially in an environment of cyber communication. They cause these on-line message boards to turn into meaningless drivel, and they can easily get "'mis'taken" and be a cause of hurt feelings. Substantive, in-"depth" commentary (of all sorts) is what I thought you guys loved about this site, in any event. on 07/04/07 at 13:27:49, MordecaiCourage wrote:
You agree. With what is it that you are actually agreeing, MC? There's little to nothing there (of all too much value). Anyway, NO, this thread is right where it belongs, MC. AS I HAVE ALWAYS STATED, threads take on a life of their own, and I'm not going to stop that. Assuming it's not a "pick" thread, where neatness of format and sticking to the point of the thread is necessary in terms of organization, as long as it was originally appropriately placed and done so forthrightly, it is free to naturally meander. I want people to truly get to know one another (which takes more than one-liners, and even paragraphs for that matter) and would never consider stifling a discussion that's going on. There may be cases where threads are best off moved (to "the Sidelines"), but discussions should not be forcibly "sidelined", and, at any rate, the need to move a thread in this kind of situation is going to be rather rare. This surely isn't one of them, all things considered (namely the "official" function this thread is serving). If your point is just to silence me (on my site),... well,... (smiley left out to spare you of my true feelings right now) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by MordecaiCourage on Jul 4th, 2007, 6:59pm on 07/04/07 at 18:31:51, StegRock wrote:
Value is in the eyes of the beholder (How's that for a one-liner or a bumper sticker slogan?) ;) Quote:
Sounds good to me, I love the life that these threads take on...I'm not trying to railroad it, it just seems to me that this is the kind of conversation that normally is SEEN over on the Sidelines. Quote:
Silence you????? No ... never! Never, ever, ever, try to spare me your true feelings...I can (actually prefer) to take my lumps...or medicine...or hand-slap....or dogging....or whatever it is that's being dished out. There is no need to ever spare my feelings anywhere on this site...I just can't get my feelings hurt in this stuff! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 4th, 2007, 7:31pm on 07/04/07 at 18:59:44, MordecaiCourage wrote:
Lest we forget the "life" the "Bears In-season Report" thread took on up in "the Red Zone" last season (with [smiley=dog.gif] and me... and WB). ... You are right, in general, though. [smiley=yes.gif] However, even threads started on "the Sidelines" are not just supposed to be started whimsically or about anything under the sun. They are still supposed to be football- or web site-related. Quote:
Well, I can and do get my feelings hurt here, though, I suppose, I'm coming at this from a VERY different vantagepoint, which I'm sure you can appreciate. There is more "at stake" for me here, and I'm not just talking about "cutting the ribbon on the FantasyFootballer.com office someday". I'm talking philosophy of life (yes, "Philosophy"), community and learning about people (in this "disassociative" cyber environment, at least, but also more generally since the number of people we come into contact with in life is locationally contingent and, in any event, EXTREMELY limited). All of that said,... you asked for it, MC, so here it is: [smiley=flipoffangrily.gif] ... ;) ... [smiley=cantcatch.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 4th, 2007, 8:13pm To just work my way back toward C-dub (I think)... Good life philosophies are surely simple,... but not necessarily easy to live. So, people get away from them (pretty damn quickly), and things, the philosophies, then, get complicated and difficult,... VERY complicated and difficult. And, to work our ways back "up" to just even having a good grasp of those simple life philosophies takes serious effort. The philosophies themselves are simple, but, besides living them, getting back to them conceptually is extraordinarily difficult because to do so you have to work your way back up through all of the/your convoluted bullshit. Without, first, truly appreciating them and, then, living them, all we have are platitudes and bumper stickers and tons of hypocrites. All of that having been said, there is also the reality that bad life philosophies too are simple and, actually, much "easier" to live, that is, fall into. :-/ It is in this sense (getting us to the good) where religion gives way to philosophy. Theists need to remember this. It is in the converse sense (cultivating belief in the good/getting us to "get" the good) that philosophy gives way to religion. Philosophers need to remember that. Now, what C-dub states about the Bible is true of other texts like the Koran, the Mahabharata, the Book of Mormon, and, as I am quite concerned, the Dao De Jing, just to name a few,... a very few. But, anyway, I'm not so sure that is, in and of itself, a "good" thing. Look no farther than the modern-day (mis/ab)usage of the Koran, notably, vis-a-vis this conversation, as cultivated in the madrassas. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 5th, 2007, 6:55am That last part put another way... While even children can pick up on the morals of the stories, it takes mature adults willing to take on the challenge of setting the examples to really get the message across. And, the most important "moral story" is that of (non-vocational) education, i.e. not job training. Unfortunately, this is a sensibility virtually, if not entirely, lost in America given our pragmatic capitalist conditioning. The fact is when it comes to education, adults have to set the standard by leading by example. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 5th, 2007, 5:18pm on 07/04/07 at 20:13:53, StegRock wrote:
Just a note,... just to let yous know, I added a couple parentheticals to this sequence of sentences so as to make what I was saying above a bit more clear. After a reread here this morning, I myself had to take pause and think back through what I meant... [smiley=uh.gif] ... ?.?.? ... :P ... :-[ ... ;D ... [smiley=rollinwithlaughter.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jul 5th, 2007, 11:10pm Steggo, [smiley=dramaqueen.gif] You have clearly read much into little when reading a fairly simply stated post. You state that you may have gotten your feelings hurt, yet you unabashedly state that what I had written had little to no value...am I to assume that you believe that I have no feelings...that I am shallow...that I live a life composed of red neck one liner bumper stickers...that when I evoke the words "Bible" and "charismatic" that automatically equals lunatics like David Koresh and Jim Jones. That is called a scare crow tactic, there is really nothing wrong with what was said, so you build a scare crow, in this case built of misguided, murderous, rapists, like Jones and Koresh and you knock that house of straw down. Frankly, there was not the slightest intent of malice or put down in anything that I stated directed at you. You do have a far superior grasp of the english language than I and are willing to share your knowledge...even wisdom, but when someone trys to share a small scap of balance, perhaps knowledge and god forbid wisdom...your reaction is not one of understanding and insight...but of defensive attack. Your verbage shows a clear distain for opinions that differ from your own. I happen to be fairly transparent and take no offense to what you have to say about what I write. I also respect what you have to say about what I write, namely that it has little to no value, that may be true. It is your opinion and you are entitled to that. What you don't seem to understand and maybe I'm wrong about this...if so just tell me...but you have a public website...you want to go national with a magazine...don't you think there may be just a few of us simple minded rogues from the outback that may want to read a diversity of opinions? Yes, opinions that may be 180 degrees away from where you stand. Don't you think that every King David may need a Nathan to help him discern the truth? For that matter what is truth, except a journey through life...including a nut from Southern Illinois talking to a philosopher in Hawaii about football and philosophy. Steggo, I like you or I would not be spending my time here. I apologize in advance for any unintended put downs that you may read into anything just stated. No journey through life would be complete without a hambone or two thrown in to make one continue to think through one's own path. [smiley=fingerscrossed.gif] |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by StegRock on Jul 5th, 2007, 11:59pm I don't harbor anything, man. But, I do vent and get things off my chest. [smiley=titflash.gif] I too like you (and MC), and that's why it hurts a little extra. I'm just dying for someone to "get me" out there (besides my GBRFL guys) [and, frankly speaking, I'm not even talking just about here; I'm talking Philosophy profs (not colleagues, though) too, with the exception of the GREAT Dr. Peimin Ni, [smiley=smitten.gif] who literally could finish my sentences and I, his] and, thus, really get the "bigger picture" of where I am going here, which is a wonderful vision. In any event, what is it, then, C-dub, that you were trying to communicate in your post because I, for the life of me, don't "get it"??? [smiley=dunce.gif] ... [smiley=stilldunno.gif] And, by the way, the move I pulled wasn't so much a straw-man move, though that seemed like a good way to sway it at the moment, as it was to point out that "succinctness" and "charisma" are not "goods" in and of themselves. That was the spirit of my post regarding comparing all those "Great Books" along the lines you had laid out. One last philosophical note, if one thing has been absolutely obvious since I've opened this place, it is that I am no fan of (mere) "opinion" per se, especially in a(n intellectual) climate where the pervasive mindset is that everybody deserves to have an opinion about everything and, moreover, everybody's opinion must be of equal value because freedom of speech is an equal right. Then, (and I know MC was jesting here) you end up with a culture based on "agreeing to disagree", "value's being in the eyes of the beholder", etc., which are really just cop-outs, and, yet, we wonder why values are deteriorating in America. (I digress... Could it be that we are unwilling, perhaps at this point, ill-equipped and unable to do the hard work of moral education?) Agreements are signs of progress, and any philosophy worth its weight is about coming to agreements, to points of agreement, and probing and pressing the areas of disagreement, instead of just "agreeing to disagree", no less from the get-go. Most notably, that was the philosophy of Socrates and Plato. It's not about winning a debate, which is what drives us in America. It's about rigorously arguing to agreement. Anyway, America is in such knots because of this aforementioned dynamic... that,... [smiley=no.gif] in the least, the words of a chap like me are almost unintelligible, and, at worst,... :-/ |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by cwhams on Jul 6th, 2007, 1:57pm ;) Well stated Steg, that is the kind of response that I really appreciate. ;D I'm begining to see where you are comming from and not just your vision for the site, but your desire for intellectual stimulation. That seems to go hand in foot with this site, a deeper more analytical interpretation of the raw facts, specifically regarding site members and our respective love of football. I believe all that was intended by my brief comment was that perhaps your progess in this area is more advanced than many of us on the site. Your job then becomes to nurture the growth of those interested in becomming a part of your vision. You are accomplishing that with me. Baby steps with many of us...patience with all of us...that may mean breaking things down...at times into smaller, more easily understandable components...the cob webs will eventually clear from our minds so that we can handle larger deeper conversations. That's not to say that I don't personally get a kick out of reading your longer writings. ;D I find myself smiling and enjoying many of your posts...even when I don't respond. :) |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Tony_O on Jul 8th, 2007, 11:15pm on 07/06/07 at 13:57:44, cwhams wrote:
Well stated! |
||||||
|
Title: Re: 1st "Huddle" Rankings/Mock Draft of '07 - Comm Post by Tony_O on Jul 8th, 2007, 11:17pm I rather enjoyed that particular serve and volly(wow, was that a tennis reference on a Fantasy football site, my bad)! |
||||||
|
Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1! YaBB © 2000-2002, Xnull. All Rights Reserved. |