The Master Vent Thread-Negativity Within-Enter at Your Own Risk

[Vitamike]

By the way, I'm hearing Winston may go No 1 overall over MM on SC.

Humm...

 

[27mtrcougar]

Yes he was the "undisputed" number one QB coming-out, because the class of QB's was unbelievably weak!

Sorry, but Houston could have used a QB the year Williams came out, and they took Williams, Houston could have used a QB last year, but they took Clooney, so what is your point again?

I don't know what Tampa's need is this year, so I couldn't tell you what their pick should be, but evidently you know.

And you are the one one that said EVERY scouting report had Bradford as the top pick in the draft, I guess I will call on Yiu!

Houston took David Carr number one overall a couple years before that so he was still under a mega contract. So taking another quarterback didn't really make sense. They still had to find out if David Carr was going to work or not. Besides that year there really wasn't a quarterback to take.

Last year Houston took Clowney probably the most hyped up and top defense of player prospect ever. But the main reason is there simply was not a quarterback to take number one. Sometimes that happens. that's why when you have the opportunity to take a quarterback number one like Sam you have to take it you can't pass on it if you're an NFL team.

Sam was the number one quarterback. you're right some scouts had Suh number one overall. But when two players are rated around the same the quarterback will always win. It is by far the most important position to fill and the hardest. Especially when your team needs one.

 

[27mtrcougar]

God I wish I had the inside information that you have on ALL NFL teams! I'm thinking, because I don't know like you do, that any smart team would look at the fact that Bradford hadn't played in TWO years and weigh whether it was "safe" to take a chance on that or go with the BPA and maybe find a FA or go with what you had at QB, until the next year, when supposedly the QB class was filled with more options.

Again he had an amazing college career. You can't use injury as an excuse for the Rams to pass on him. He hurt his shoulder in college and that has never been a problem with him in the nfl. That's why they have them do physicals and pro days. He passed with flying colors.

 

[Smed55]

Again he had an amazing college career. You can't use injury as an excuse for the Rams to pass on him. He hurt his shoulder in college and that has never been a problem with him in the nfl. That's why they have them do physicals and pro days. He passed with flying colors.

I'm not using his injury in college as the excuse!hello, hello, all I'm saying is he didn't play for TWO, a lot can happen in TWO years of not playing competitive football.

He didn't have an "amazing" college career, he had one amazing Sophomore season, that means nothing TWO years Down the road, lots of guys have ONE amazing season, doesn't mean they are good or will ever have another season like it. His junior year didn't start out so amazing! If you would have projected his season out his junior year (and that's all you can do at that point) his team would have had a average year and he would have thrown 14 TD passes, even if he would of had a good year, he wouldn't have come close to the year he had his sophomore year, you know why, maybe teams figured him out! Anyway that's your answer to everyone else that struggles!

 

[Retroram52]

Smed it's not about what you would've done. most people would've took Suh. But not NFL teams. it's nothing to do with Bradford. It could've been any quarterback . my point is the rams had to take the quarterback. Show me where a team has picked a defense of tackle or any other position when they've needed a quarterback picking number one. This year will be no different. But by your logic Tampa Bay should take the safe pick and take the All-Pro defense of tackle. Which very well might be the better pick. But they have to pick the quarterback because they need one

Cougar. You are beginning to make general statements outside your pay grade. The Rams picked Orlando Pace in 1997, number one overall, and we needed a QB because the QB at the time was Tony Banks. There are a lot of factors that contribute to what a team does in picking BPA versus a QB overall in the first round as well as the draft. It's not always the case if given a choice between a QB and another position, a team always selects a QB. Generally speaking there is a trend for that but even that generality has broad strokes that are not very reliable. Your man love for Bradford is beginning to create a goassameric quality to what you claim the methods teams use in approaching the draft.

 

[Smed55]

Just go old school Smed.

Find your link, write it down, then type it in.
Good luck finding a link in the first place of that 'proven fact'.









Just a heads up, there is no link because the data is subjective so therefore it can not be quantified or stated as fact.

Just so you know, if these QB's had average, to below average careers I think that it can be stated as a fact that yes they were misses, and not worth the number one pick.

But I do appreciate the "fact" that you pushed me into broadening my Lack of computer skills, and I'm not being sarcastic, hey I didn't know!

 

[Smed55]

Houston took David Carr number one overall a couple years before that so he was still under a mega contract. So taking another quarterback didn't really make sense. They still had to find out if David Carr was going to work or not. Besides that year there really wasn't a quarterback to take.

Last year Houston took Clowney probably the most hyped up and top defense of player prospect ever. But the main reason is there simply was not a quarterback to take number one. Sometimes that happens. that's why when you have the opportunity to take a quarterback number one like Sam you have to take it you can't pass on it if you're an NFL team.

Sam was the number one quarterback. you're right some scouts had Suh number one overall. But when two players are rated around the same the quarterback will always win. It is by far the most important position to fill and the hardest. Especially when your team needs one.

Well first of all David Carr had already been there for 4 years, similar to the Sammie situation, had compiled a 16-43 record, so yes they needed a new QB. Houston decided to instead build their defense and held onto Carr one more year, then just dumped him and picked up a FA QB in Schaub, a very good move at the time!

As far as taking Clowney, ya you take him, supposedly, we don't know yet, he makes your defense better. As far as the QB class, 4 of them were statrters for NFL teams this year, Bradford was the only option in 2010. And if you read the scouting reports on last years QB's a lot of the same things were said, strong arm, makes good decisions, can make all the throws.

The only true statement you make is QB is the most important and hardest to fill. Everything else is

 

[Vitamike]

Just so you know, if these QB's had average, to below average careers I think that it can be stated as a fact that yes they were misses, and not worth the number one pick.

But I do appreciate the "fact" that you pushed me into broadening my Lack of computer skills, and I'm not being sarcastic, hey I didn't know!

Glad I could help!

Now to your first sentence and spin control...

Remember, you said this...

I guess I didn't realize you asked me that? I really don't care who other teams take, we have enough problems getting our picks right! not real familiar with what their actual number one need is, they do obviously need a QB, but as I have said before, picking QB' s with your first pick doesn't work out for teams as much as they fail and that is a proven fact whether you believe it or not. As far as Marriota, he might not make a good NFL QB, again as I've stated, the NFL is littered with can't miss QB's that missed, hell, we have one!

I think that there is probably one or two of this years QB's that might turn out to be fairly good, and it doesn't mean it will be one of the supposed top two, the question is, which one will it be, I have no idea?

You were tasked, on your own account, to provide a link to the facts that picking QB's with your first pick doesn't work out for teams as much as they fail.

Fail, is a huge component to your assertion of fact. Do you see now where this is subjective and cannot be proven as fact.

Anyway if 8 of 17 (More than half) make it to the Superbowl and 13 of 17 were either Super Bowl Champs or Pro Bowlers than how can it be a fact that more fail than succeed?

 

[Vitamike]

Cougar. You are beginning to make general statements outside your pay grade. The Rams picked Orlando Pace in 1997, number one overall, and we needed a QB because the QB at the time was Tony Banks. There are a lot of factors that contribute to what a team does in picking BPA versus a QB overall in the first round as well as the draft. It's not always the case if given a choice between a QB and another position, a team always selects a QB. Generally speaking there is a trend for that but even that generality has broad strokes that are not very reliable. Your man love for Bradford is beginning to create a goassameric quality to what you claim the methods teams use in approaching the draft.

Retro, with all due respect, Coug did leave room in his statement regarding a lack of a highly touted QB in said draft. If there was a QB drafted in the top five I think we could call on Coug here however the first QB picked was at the bottom of round 1 by the name of Jim Druckenmiller, drafted by San Fran with the No. 26th pick overall.

It was a poor year for drafting QB as the next QB off the boards was Jake Plummer drafted in the 2nd round and No. 46 overall.

Had St Louis drafted either of these two as the No. 1 overall they would have been disallowed to partake in an NFL draft for 5 years!

Well maybe not but that's what I would have suggested!

 

[Vitamike]

Glad I could help!

Now to your first sentence and spin control...

Remember, you said this...

You were tasked, on your own account, to provide a link to the facts that picking QB's with your first pick doesn't work out for teams as much as they fail.

Fail, is a huge component to your assertion of fact. Do you see now where this is subjective and cannot be proven as fact.

Anyway if 8 of 17 (Almost half) win a Superbowl and 13 of 17 were either Super Bowl Champs or Pro Bowlers than how can it be a fact that more fail than succeed?

Fixed it for me!

 

[Retroram52]

Yea I remember Druckenmiller Vita. I was addressing the overall general statement that has been going back-and-forth between Cougar and SJ76 and Smed.

 

[Smed55]

Glad I could help!

Now to your first sentence and spin control...

Remember, you said this...

You were tasked, on your own account, to provide a link to the facts that picking QB's with your first pick doesn't work out for teams as much as they fail.

Fail, is a huge component to your assertion of fact. Do you see now where this is subjective and cannot be proven as fact.

Anyway if 8 of 17 (More than half) make it to the Superbowl and 13 of 17 were either Super Bowl Champs or Pro Bowlers than how can it be a fact that more fail than succeed?

Well, first of all, I would like to know where you went to school, 8-17 IS LESS THAN HALF, and that my friend is a FACT.I may be wrong, but I think that figure is only 7-18? Yes I'm including Sammie, he's been in the league for 5 years and has done Notta! You can count Namath all you want, but he wouldn't have gone 1st in the NFL and as a matter of FACT, he didn't! Now if you want to count that, I guess we better add the USFL in there and it would be even worse!


As to your other point I will concede that some of those QB's actually made a couple of Pro Bowls, but if you check their stats AND their teams records, there success was not there. Except for maybe two good years out of 10-12years, all, yes I said ALL of those QB's that you are alluding to other than the Super Bowl Qb' and a couple of others, were average, at best! If you want to continue to say that they were better than average I guess you can live in that world!

Carry on and add Sammie into that group if you want!

 

[27mtrcougar]

Retro, with all due respect, Coug did leave room in his statement regarding a lack of a highly touted QB in said draft. If there was a QB drafted in the top five I think we could call on Coug here however the first QB picked was at the bottom of round 1 by the name of Jim Druckenmiller, drafted by San Fran with the No. 26th pick overall.

It was a poor year for drafting QB as the next QB off the boards was Jake Plummer drafted in the 2nd round and No. 46 overall.

Had St Louis drafted either of these two as the No. 1 overall they would have been disallowed to partake in an NFL draft for 5 years!

Well maybe not but that's what I would have suggested!

Yes commonsense does apply. If there is no quarterback you might have to pick somebody else.

 

[27mtrcougar]

Well first of all David Carr had already been there for 4 years, similar to the Sammie situation, had compiled a 16-43 record, so yes they needed a new QB. Houston decided to instead build their defense and held onto Carr one more year, then just dumped him and picked up a FA QB in Schaub, a very good move at the time!

As far as taking Clowney, ya you take him, supposedly, we don't know yet, he makes your defense better. As far as the QB class, 4 of them were statrters for NFL teams this year, Bradford was the only option in 2010. And if you read the scouting reports on last years QB's a lot of the same things were said, strong arm, makes good decisions, can make all the throws.

The only true statement you make is QB is the most important and hardest to fill. Everything else is

like I said David Carr was still under contract and the year they picked Mario Williams there was absolutely no quarterback to take it number one. Everyone thought the pick was going to be Reggie Bush but they shocked everyone picking Williams. Again there was no quarterback to pick.

I only count three quarterbacks that went in round one last year. Brotels, Johnny and Bridgewater. None of those guys were projected to go number one. The jags who desperately needed a quarterback reached for Brotels at 3. Manziel is a wreck, Bridgewater looks pretty good.

 

[27mtrcougar]

Cougar. You are beginning to make general statements outside your pay grade. The Rams picked Orlando Pace in 1997, number one overall, and we needed a QB because the QB at the time was Tony Banks. There are a lot of factors that contribute to what a team does in picking BPA versus a QB overall in the first round as well as the draft. It's not always the case if given a choice between a QB and another position, a team always selects a QB. Generally speaking there is a trend for that but even that generality has broad strokes that are not very reliable. Your man love for Bradford is beginning to create a goassameric quality to what you claim the methods teams use in approaching the draft.

Yeah but there was no quarterback to take. if there was we would've taken one especially with Tony Banks Circus.

 

[Vitamike]

Well, first of all, I would like to know where you went to school, 8-17 IS LESS THAN HALF, and that my friend is a FACT.I may be wrong, but I think that figure is only 7-18? Yes I'm including Sammie, he's been in the league for 5 years and has done Notta! You can count Namath all you want, but he wouldn't have gone 1st in the NFL and as a matter of FACT, he didn't! Now if you want to count that, I guess we better add the USFL in there and it would be even worse!


As to your other point I will concede that some of those QB's actually made a couple of Pro Bowls, but if you check their stats AND their teams records, there success was not there. Except for maybe two good years out of 10-12years, all, yes I said ALL of those QB's that you are alluding to other than the Super Bowl Qb' and a couple of others, were average, at best! If you want to continue to say that they were better than average I guess you can live in that world!

Carry on and add Sammie into that group if you want!

In almost two hours before this bullshit!

At least I can admit a mistake, so to hell with you!

You knew long better before your post!




Yeah, if you want to know what I was thinking, was Alex Smith made it to the Super Bowl and that is all you can ask from a No.1 overall pick is a chance to get to the Super Bowl that makes it 9 of 17 better than 50%!

Maybe not winning it all doesn't meet your standard of failure! But this is exactly what I mean by subjective assessments rather than objective quantification.

How about you addressing the 13 of 17 that either won the Super Bowl or were in the Pro Bowl?

Too weak to answer that one I see.

Too Pathetic!

And don't play me brother!

We all know better..

 

[Retroram52]

Yeah but there was no quarterback to take. if there was we would've taken one especially with Tony Banks Circus.

That is not entirely true Cougar. Banks was going to be gone sooner rather than later because he was terrible and the offense he ran under Robinson/Rich Brooks was run oriented. Dick Vermeil wanted to rebuild the O-line and I am sure his decision wasn't too complicated with the notion that QB's in that draft were slim so they went with O PAce which was both need and BPA. Howver the point was that it does happen based on what the coaches/FO office decide based on their needs to build a club back from disaster and that is the point you continually disregard.

 

[Smed55]

In almost two hours before this bullshit!

At least I can admit a mistake, so to hell with you!

You knew long better before your post!




Yeah, if you want to know what I was thinking, was Alex Smith made it to the Super Bowl and that is all you can ask from a No.1 overall pick is a chance to get to the Super Bowl that makes it 9 of 17 better than 50%!

Maybe not winning it all doesn't meet your standard of failure! But this is exactly what I mean by subjective assessments rather than objective quantification.


How about you addressing the 13 of 17 that either won the Super Bowl or were in the Pro Bowl?Too weak to answer that one I see.Too Pathetic!
And don't play me brother!

We all know better..

Well I'm pretty sure I already conceded that a few of the 13-17 that either won Super Bowl or AllPro had a couple of good years, George, Bartkowski, Testeverde, Vick, All had maybe two good years, other than that, they were average! Bledsoe had maybe 3 good years out of 12, otherwise very average to below average career, that's why it was so easy for nE to let him go!

smith has had some good game manager years, nothing special, for the most the teams he has been on have relied on the running game, and have not relied on Smith to take them any where, just not to F up, and he has done that! There must be some reason that the 9ers benched him in favor of Kaep, so Smith technically didn't take them to the Super Bowl, so take him and your Namath out of there and it's 7-17.

I can admit when I'm wrong, I took back my statement about Namath already, he was pretty damn good!

 

[Smed55]

That is not entirely true Cougar. Banks was going to be gone sooner rather than later because he was terrible and the offense he ran under Robinson/Rich Brooks was run oriented. Dick Vermeil wanted to rebuild the O-line and I am sure his decision wasn't too complicated with the notion that QB's in that draft were slim so they went with O PAce which was both need and BPA. Howver the point was that it does happen based on what the coaches/FO office decide based on their needs to build a club back from disaster and that is the point you continually disregard.

thank you for "getting it"

 

[Vitamike]

Well I'm pretty sure I already conceded that a few of the 13-17 that either won Super Bowl or AllPro had a couple of good years, George, Bartkowski, Testeverde, Vick, All had maybe two good years, other than that, they were average! Bledsoe had maybe 3 good years out of 12, otherwise very average to below average career, that's why it was so easy for nE to let him go!

smith has had some good game manager years, nothing special, for the most the teams he has been on have relied on the running game, and have not relied on Smith to take them any where, just not to F up, and he has done that! There must be some reason that the 9ers benched him in favor of Kaep, so Smith technically didn't take them to the Super Bowl, so take him and your Namath out of there and it's 7-17.

I can admit when I'm wrong, I took back my statement about Namath already, he was pretty damn good!

Okay, we're cool then.

I still wasn't sure you conceded your original statement though bro.

Just ticked me off a bit that I admitted an obvious mistake two hours before you chimed in about it.

Wasn't aware you conceded the original argument to any degree.




We're all good brother!