Jump to content

Hank Chinaski

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hank Chinaski

  1. The first problem with the pick is the opportunity cost of taking Penix: they probably missed out on adding a good starter to the team (like Dallas Turner or Byron Murphy). The second problem is that Penix is probably a backup for the first two years of his rookie deal. A good QB on a rookie deal is the most valuable asset in the nfl. So you don’t get to take full advantage of that. On the other hand, they probably think they’re a playoff team with Cousins (so they won’t be picking high) and they probably only plan to have Cousins for two years (so they’ll need another QB soon). If they really think that Penix is a franchise QB, then it makes sense to take him now because of how much more important the position is than any other. If he really is that good, say a top 10 QB starting in 2026, then it’s a great pick because they probably won’t have an opportunity to get that in two years without spending a huge chunk of the cap or a ton of draft capital. Im not necessarily defending the pick, just saying that I’m not sure it’s as crazy as people are making it out to be.
  2. Good lord. The takeaways from that thread of idiocy are: 1. They appear to believe that the AAS is a Texas fan site. 2. They may be unaware that the transfer portal/NIL impact in college football can lead to situations where a team can add multiple players likely to be drafted in a single offseason. Just spitballing, but maybe 15 won’t actually be that crazy of a number in the future. And maybe Nick Saban’s past, under completely different circumstances, isn’t all that relevant?
  3. I admittedly know very little about the new landscape of things, but I’ve read that OU (and other schools) are strategically setting up to invest in certain sports. My question - isn’t it inevitable that OU will eventually do exactly this (redirect funds from baseball/basketball/softball/whatever toward football) more frequently? Won’t the need to compete in cases exactly like this recruitment result eventually in them ceasing to give a shit about other sports? I suppose there may be specific funding streams invested in specific sports, but seems as though they won’t just let football fall off.
  4. That’s all fine; I think that it’s fair, however, to view some of the things you don’t care about as indicators that he’ll be unsuccessful at the things you do care about. For example - an adult, an NFL Hall of Famer, and a coach in a position of power, deciding it is necessary to publicly belittle a former player. You may not care about the action itself, but what does it say about him? Are successful leaders typically that thin-skinned and petty? Is it really that easy to distract him? You may say that no, one has nothing to do with the other, and that I’m nuts or dramatic. But these types of childish actions don’t give a lot of confidence that this is a serious person or that he has a lot of perspective. And they would thus give me concern if I were in any way invested in his ability to make that a winning program (similar to how Tom Herman’s ridiculous and childish taunting of the Missouri QB gave me concerns about his ability to succeed). I’m not rooting for the guy to fail, but I don’t see why anyone would expect him to thrive. He constructs rosters in a way that has no track record of success and he is publicly childish. Somehow I’m not impressed.
  5. If the author’s methodology (which I haven’t taken the time to try to understand) concludes something that is different than my completely biased preconceived expectation, then they lose all credibility!
  6. If highly-rated recruits go to Texas and don’t get drafted high, then it’s because Texas coaches failed to develop them. If highly-rated recruits go to Texas and do get drafted high, then it’s because they were so physically talented that it was just inevitable (but also they’re overrated anyway). I’ve never encountered a group so dedicated to refusing to acknowledge that things they don’t want to be true about the world may actually be true.
  7. Hopefully Canales can help make Young better. He managed to make Baker look not shitty in TB.
  8. I swear our RBs always get picked by teams with the shittiest QBs.
  9. Maybe years after they retire, but young men regularly engaging in vigorous exercise/training seem unlikely to have metabolic disorders associated with sedentary lifestyle, even if they carry a lot of weight.
  10. I’d be shocked if “quite a few” NFL professional athletes in their 20s and early 30s had type 2 diabetes.
  11. Their assertion that Texas has an easy schedule, after over a decade of furiously stroking off over the inherent toughness of SEC schedules, is quintessential aggie.
  12. I doubt anyone thinks that, though I do think he would have had a chance to do well in the Kubiak/Shanahan offense. The bigger problem was that the franchise had the chance to bring a jolt of energy and interest to what had been a terribly boring operation, and instead they chose…a DE from NC State.
  13. I hope yall didn’t drink whatever Baylor gave you.
  14. The series was a hell of a lot more fun during the decade before that IMO.
  15. Disagree. I enjoy coming back to this thread every 2-3 weeks and catching up on the arguments. I can’t really explain why, but I enjoy this thread. And I don’t even really like basketball.
  16. Yeah. The 8 bench reps at his size was shockingly bad at the combine and he wasn’t particularly fast either. I think he was generally considered a R2 guy before the testing; I can’t imagine he’s selected before round 3 at this point, and he may go lower than that.
  17. No, I’d recommend this guy
  18. He may be redundant since they signed Brown.
  19. That was Shane Rink. Cypress Creek HS.
  20. Finally. I’m very ready for this.
×
×
  • Create New...