:: 2011 First Round - Page 3

http://www.thecfl.us/forum/

2011 First Round http://www.thecfl.us/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2689	Page 3 of 5

Author:	Raven Hawk [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:01 am ]
Post subject:
[quoteb1af8dc="SkyDog"][quoteb1af8dc="P. Luxx"][quoteb1af8dc="TurfToe"]I will be out of town until Monday night. I'm stocking my utility and RavenHawk has power of attorney of the Rounders. If we get past my next pick and the utility is empty he will make my pick for me. Does anyone know how to get the word 'sucker' removed from a forehead... [/quoteb1af8dc] If your first pick is 2.2, you'll be back in time to make it yourself. Relax. We might get to 2.2 by Wednesday.[/quoteb1af8dc] No kidding. This pace is ridiculous.[/quoteb1af8dc] Welcome to the CFL n00b

Author:	Taco [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:47 am ]
Post subject:
The 1st round always takes us forever, but we usually go through the final rounds quickly - even doing as much as two rounds per day. It seems that everyone uses the utility for the later rounds, but not everyone uses it for the first round. I'm not sure why that is the case, but that's the way it has been in the CFL. The time limit drops to 4 hours after the first round, so that helps speed things up as well. There is a chance that we won't finish the draft according to the schedule (one week from now), but if I have to push everything else back then that's what I'll have to do.

Author:	Cotton [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:57 am ]
Post subject:
[quote56832b1="Taco"]The 1st round always takes us forever, but we usually go through the final rounds quickly - even doing as much as two rounds per day. It seems that everyone uses the utility for the later rounds, but not everyone uses it for the first round. I'm not sure why that is the case, but that's the way it has been in the CFL.[/quote56832b1] I could never figure out why my ex-girlfriend spent so much time at a sale at Macy's or Filene's. The first round reminds me of days when she'd drag me out there. Just glad the finicky little shopper is my ex and not my current.

Author:	Joe [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:57 am ]
Post subject:
[quote2926bf1="SkyDog"] No kidding. This pace is ridiculous.[/quote2926bf1] Watch out. As we learned last year, we are not allowed to complain about the draft.

Author:	Meatholes [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:55 am ]
Post subject:
I am heading out to our lake for a few hours. Hopefully I will get my pick I have loaded, but I have been waiting patently like the rest of us for this last pick to happen. Sorry if I cause any delays, I have held off the family as long as I can.

Author:	Fonzie [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:
Has anybody seen General Mike lately? Does he know he's on the clock?

Author:	Joe [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:24 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote42075f3="Fonzie"]Has anybody seen General Mike lately? Does he know he's on the clock?[/quote42075f3] Not since yesterday AM.

Author:	fantastic flying froggies [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:51 pm ]
Post subject:
A great pick for Albany at 1.19.

Author:	thater [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote5da5ab5="fantastic flying froggies"]A great pick for Albany at 1.19.[/quote5da5ab5] I wonder if you mean anything by that, hmmm. A compliment from a rival, must be taken cautiously, thank you though.

Author:	fantastic flying froggies [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:55 pm ]
Post subject:
[quoteacbdc26="thater"][quoteacbdc26="fantastic flying froggies"]A great pick for Albany at 1.19.[/quoteacbdc26] I wonder if you mean anything by that, hmmm. A compliment from a rival, must be taken cautiously, thank you though.[/quoteacbdc26] Actually, I was serious! I really mean it, I thought Harvey would go much higher than that!

Author:	Cotton [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:55 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote727ac95="thater"][quote727ac95="fantastic flying froggies"]A great pick for Albany at 1.19.[/quote727ac95] I wonder if you mean anything by that, hmmm. A compliment from a rival, must be taken cautiously, thank you though.[/quote727ac95] It was my #1 choice and it goes right before me. Doink! Anyway, my #4 choice was still around which is more than I can ask for at 1.20. I really wanted Harvey big time.

Author:	thater [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:55 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote6b06a92="fantastic flying froggies"][quote6b06a92="thater"][quote6b06a92="fantastic flying froggies"]A great pick for Albany at 1.19.[/quote6b06a92] I wonder if you mean anything by that, hmmm. A compliment from a rival, must be taken cautiously, thank you though.[/quote6b06a92] Actually, I was serious! I really mean it, I thought Harvey would go much higher than that![/quote6b06a92] Well in that case, thank you very much.

Author:	Cotton [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:56 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote0982c5d="fantastic flying froggies"][quote0982c5d="thater"][quote0982c5d="fantastic flying froggies"]A great pick for Albany at 1.19.[/quote0982c5d] I wonder if you mean anything by that, hmmm. A compliment from a rival, must be taken cautiously, thank you though.[/quote0982c5d] Actually, I was serious! I really mean it, I thought Harvey would go much higher than that![/quote0982c5d] Me, too! I almost nabbed him. Shucks.

Author:	Raven Hawk [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:
Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .

Author:	Cotton [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:
[quotebc48a7e="Raven Hawk"]Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .[/quotebc48a7e] I like him, too. We have a couple decent ones, but I would have gladly taken him.

Author:	Shooter [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:10 pm ]
Post subject:
[quoted2c58e0="Raven Hawk"]Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .[/quoted2c58e0] You do that. That experiment failed big time over a 2-year span in San Antonio.

Author:	Cotton [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 5:54 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote19c3705="Raven Hawk"]Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .[/quote19c3705] Just make sure your #1 receiver is at flanker. Not like bonehead here in the wildcard game. No wonder Cools wanted out of Fargo. Football 101. You can't have three ends on one line. It's a geometric impossibility.

Author:	Raven Hawk [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:08 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote94daa56="Shooter"][quote94daa56="Raven Hawk"]Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .[/quote94daa56] You do that. That experiment failed big time over a 2-year span in San Antonio.[/quote94daa56] Yes, but you didn't have a running game.

Author:	Shooter [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:41 pm ]
Post subject:
That's where you are wrong sir. It did provide results to either the #1 or #2 rushing team that year.

Author:	fantastic flying froggies [ Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:07 pm ]
Post subject:
[quote712f008="Raven Hawk"]Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .[/quote712f008] I was really really hoping he'd fall to me at 1.28, he was the player I'd targeted there since the beginning of the draft. He could have been my next Manos...

Author:	Raven Hawk [ Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:04 am ]
Post subject:
[quotea11e200="fantastic flying froggies"][quotea11e200="Raven Hawk"]Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .[/quotea11e200] I was really really hoping he'd fall to me at 1.28, he was the player I'd targeted there since the beginning of the draft. He could have been my next Manos...[/quotea11e200]Yeah he was a little hard to pass up at 1.23 when you consider the following: 35 4.83 35 7.34 39 4.76 32 7.33 36 4.77 38 7.25 That first set of combine numbers belongs to Tampa Bay's Wes MacGregor who caught 64 passes for 717 yards an 5 TD's last year. he was also 9/20 run blocking. The second set of numbers belongs to San Antonio's Ricky Horowitz who caught 63 passes for 779 yards and 7 TD's last year. He was only 4/14 run blocking. That last set of numbers belongs to Knutzen.

Author:	wademoore [ Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:27 pm ]
Post subject:
[quotefa2ce07="Raven Hawk"][quotefa2ce07="fantastic flying froggies"][quotefa2ce07="Raven Hawk"]Well, if I can't get a receiver at 1.23, it looks like I'll be taking the next best thing: Ed Knutzen, come on down! We'll be running quite a bit of 2TE sets, Hartman better learn a couple more . . .[/quotefa2ce07] I was really really hoping he'd fall to me at 1.28, he was the player I'd targeted there since the beginning of the draft. He could have been my next Manos...[/quotefa2ce07]Yeah he was a little hard to pass up at 1.23 when you consider the following: 35 4.83 35 7.34 39 4.76 32 7.33 36 4.77 38 7.25 That first set of combing numbers belongs to Tampa Bay's Wes MacGregor who caught 64 passes for 717 yards an 5 TD's last year. he was also 9/20 run blocking. The second set of numbers belongs to San Antonio's Ricky Horowitz who caught 63 passes for 779 yards and 7 TD's last year. He was only 4/14 run blocking. That last set of numbers belongs to Knutzen. [/quotefa2ce07] And McGregor went quite a bit higher than that ...

Author:	Cotton [ Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:23 am ]
Post subject:
[b85f76a5]Fun Facts:[/b85f76a5] [b85f76a5]Average Time To Select:[/b85f76a5] approximately 1:52 per pick (a notch below two hours a pick) [b85f76a5]Estimated Finish Time At This Pace:[/b85f76a5] August 10th, 2006 There, I said it.

Author:	Joe [ Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:09 am ]
Post subject:
[quote587b6a5="P. Luxx"][b587b6a5]Fun Facts:[/b587b6a5] [b587b6a5]Average Time To Select:[/b587b6a5] approximately 1:52 per pick (a notch below two hours a pick) [b587b6a5]Estimated Finish Time At This Pace:[/b587b6a5] August 10th, 2006 There, I said it.[/quote587b6a5] Only 4X as slow as the IHOF draft.

Author:	Shooter [ Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:23 am ]
Post subject:
[quote703b84e="Joe"] Only 4X as slow as the IHOF draft.[/quote703b84e] This isn't IHOF. This is the CFL and we shouldn't care what IHOF does. I think any mention of IHOF in the CFL forums going forward should be penalized with a loss of a draft pick.

Page 3 of 5	All times are UTC-07:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/