All times are UTC-05:00


Phinfever Home Page

Phinfever Chatroom

Phinfever FAQ




Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
wkloiber13 wrote:
I understand you don't know the difference between optmism and gushing but come on man. Some of your statements are like the pot calling the kettle black.

Name one undrafted free agent I've gushed over except for Davone Bess, and that wasn't until he started looking really good in camp. Just because I like a prospect doesn't mean I'm "gushing" over the player and I'm definitely not "hyping" them as you say. Just because I choose to look at the upside of a player doesn't mean I ignore the holes in their game. There is a reason they weren't drafted, but I still know that sometimes good players slip through the cracks.


Oh yes it's hype alright. Jeff Fuller - "Boom or Bust" player right? We'll either "get Brandon Marshall or Derek Hagan" right? LOL

Quote:
As for Thigpen, I never said they were similar players. You came up with that assumption all on you're own. I simply said that you're the type of fan that always covets other people's retreads. Its' why you were so infatuated with us getting Orton last year. The only similarity Thigpen and Moore have is they're both career backups, they aren't real long term starters. They are guys that can come off the bench and surprise once and a while. But you don't make those guys you're starter. If you do you're doomed for failure. It's why we've struggled all of these years since Marino.


I am? Because I wanted competition for Chad Henne in the form of a capable veteran I'm in the camp who always wants retreads? You have to dig around somewhere if you're not drafting legit competition. Again, you speak in superlatives and fail to recognize proper context ..... but we've already established this over your homerism with everything Dolphin-related since the draft. You made the statement that because you were right about Thigpen, you'll be right about Moore. WTF other kind of conclusion can one come to other than you clearly think them to be the same caliber of player, which again is patently absurd at this point considering their resumes.

Quote:
There is only one place you find franchise quarterbacks, and it usually isn't the free agency market, it's in the draft. Learn how to draft and develop quarterbacks or die. This is a quarterback driven league. If you don't know that by now them maybe you should turn on the news.


There isn't "only one" ..... the probabilities are just more in favor of it.

Quote:
Another thing I'd like to point out is that you do not deny that Moore is likey going to be gone next season and that Tannehill will likely be the starter. Which means I'm not really overhyping the kid like you say. So when I say he's going to be a starter for us sooner or later, I'm not hyping, I'm giving you the facts. You should really know the difference. But if your imagination wants to run wild and you want to keep putting words in other people's mouths, then go ahead buddy, go ahead.
:yay:


What I said about Moore's contract and the need to separate himself has nothing to do with your flair for overstating Tannehill's abilities. You claim he will be our starter sooner or later and again, there's no proof of that yet. What there is proof of is the team has brought him into a situation where if he wants the position and plays well enough, they'll surely oblige. Oh those crazy if's. I have no need for letting my imagination run wild ..... we've got you for that Professor West Coast Offense.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 6:07 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
Quote:
There is only one place you find franchise quarterbacks, and it usually isn't the free agency market, it's in the draft. Learn how to draft and develop quarterbacks or die. This is a quarterback driven league. If you don't know that by now them maybe you should turn on the news.


Yes, because that is where New Orleans got Drew Brees; the draft.
It is THE only place to get a franchise QB


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 6:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
degs wrote:
Quote:
There is only one place you find franchise quarterbacks, and it usually isn't the free agency market, it's in the draft. Learn how to draft and develop quarterbacks or die. This is a quarterback driven league. If you don't know that by now them maybe you should turn on the news.


Yes, because that is where New Orleans got Drew Brees; the draft.
It is THE only place to get a franchise QB


name me another.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 6:27 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Rock Sexton wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
I understand you don't know the difference between optmism and gushing but come on man. Some of your statements are like the pot calling the kettle black.

Name one undrafted free agent I've gushed over except for Davone Bess, and that wasn't until he started looking really good in camp. Just because I like a prospect doesn't mean I'm "gushing" over the player and I'm definitely not "hyping" them as you say. Just because I choose to look at the upside of a player doesn't mean I ignore the holes in their game. There is a reason they weren't drafted, but I still know that sometimes good players slip through the cracks.


Oh yes it's hype alright. Jeff Fuller - "Boom or Bust" player right? We'll either "get Brandon Marshall or Derek Hagan" right? LOL

Quote:
As for Thigpen, I never said they were similar players. You came up with that assumption all on you're own. I simply said that you're the type of fan that always covets other people's retreads. Its' why you were so infatuated with us getting Orton last year. The only similarity Thigpen and Moore have is they're both career backups, they aren't real long term starters. They are guys that can come off the bench and surprise once and a while. But you don't make those guys you're starter. If you do you're doomed for failure. It's why we've struggled all of these years since Marino.


I am? Because I wanted competition for Chad Henne in the form of a capable veteran I'm in the camp who always wants retreads? You have to dig around somewhere if you're not drafting legit competition. Again, you speak in superlatives and fail to recognize proper context ..... but we've already established this over your homerism with everything Dolphin-related since the draft. You made the statement that because you were right about Thigpen, you'll be right about Moore. WTF other kind of conclusion can one come to other than you clearly think them to be the same caliber of player, which again is patently absurd at this point considering their resumes.

Quote:
There is only one place you find franchise quarterbacks, and it usually isn't the free agency market, it's in the draft. Learn how to draft and develop quarterbacks or die. This is a quarterback driven league. If you don't know that by now them maybe you should turn on the news.


There isn't "only one" ..... the probabilities are just more in favor of it.

Quote:
Another thing I'd like to point out is that you do not deny that Moore is likey going to be gone next season and that Tannehill will likely be the starter. Which means I'm not really overhyping the kid like you say. So when I say he's going to be a starter for us sooner or later, I'm not hyping, I'm giving you the facts. You should really know the difference. But if your imagination wants to run wild and you want to keep putting words in other people's mouths, then go ahead buddy, go ahead.
:yay:


What I said about Moore's contract and the need to separate himself has nothing to do with your flair for overstating Tannehill's abilities. You claim he will be our starter sooner or later and again, there's no proof of that yet. What there is proof of is the team has brought him into a situation where if he wants the position and plays well enough, they'll surely oblige. Oh those crazy if's. I have no need for letting my imagination run wild ..... we've got you for that Professor West Coast Offense.


Fuller was very productive in college, there is nothing that says he can't be a solid possession receiver at the next level. There were scouts that said he was a 1st round prospect after last season. So for me to say he's got a good shot at making the team isn't as outlandish, nor is it "gushing" or "hyping". It's simply facts. Just look at the kids numbers and tell me I'm wrong. They're much better than you probably think. Also, if you paid attention I also acknowledge his case of the drops last year. So I'm not really "gushing" or "hyping". Please pay attention to what I'm saying before you speak, it makes you sound silly.

As for bringing in competition for Henne, I feel like we should have gone after a quarterback in the draft after a dissapointing 3rd season. Not another re-tread in free agency. Moore was a re-tread and so was Orton. I didn't want either player. I was a big supporter of the idea that we draft Mallett. I think Mallett would have provided Henne with solid competition. If you paid attention then you would remember how much I wanted us to get Mallett. I too wanted competition for Henne, just not the kind you wanted.

Name a team that has won a Super Bowl with a free agent quarterback in the last ten years except Drew Brees and you'll see your arguement against going after franchise quarterbacks in the draft is a shaky one at best.

As for my flair for overstating Tannehill's abilities, I have done nothing more than say what every draft expert and our entire staff are saying about the kid. Also, if you think we're never going to start an 8th overall pick you're more naive than I thought, or you just choose to ignore the simple facts in front of you.

Again, you keep calling me professor West Coast, but all I've done is put up articles and common knowledge facts that anyone with an internet browser could find themselves. If you think that makes me an expert, then maybe you should do a little surfing because the information is easy to find online.

I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that you were big on Thigpen, just like you were on Orton, and just like you are now about Moore. And still you're ignoring my statement about Moore being gone next year.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 7:37 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
Iowafin wrote:
degs wrote:
Quote:
There is only one place you find franchise quarterbacks, and it usually isn't the free agency market, it's in the draft. Learn how to draft and develop quarterbacks or die. This is a quarterback driven league. If you don't know that by now them maybe you should turn on the news.


Yes, because that is where New Orleans got Drew Brees; the draft.
It is THE only place to get a franchise QB


name me another.


I was reponding to the statement that "There is only one place you find franchise quaterbacks"

As I showed that to be false, I shouldn't need to name another. I already proved my point.

But since you asked, have you ever heard of Brett Favre? Kurt Warner?


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
degs wrote:
I was reponding to the statement that "There is only one place you find franchise quaterbacks"


You ignored the part directly after that that says "it usually isn't the free agency market." Brett Favre, I've heard of, and he was traded to Green Bay, not a free agent.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 8:39 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
Iowafin wrote:
degs wrote:
I was reponding to the statement that "There is only one place you find franchise quaterbacks"


You ignored the part directly after that that says "it usually isn't the free agency market." Brett Favre, I've heard of, and he was traded to Green Bay, not a free agent.


You ignore the fact that whether free agency or trade, I provided several examples that prove what you wrote to be incorrect.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon May 14, 2012 8:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
wkloiber13 wrote:
Fuller was very productive in college, there is nothing that says he can't be a solid possession receiver at the next level. There were scouts that said he was a 1st round prospect after last season. So for me to say he's got a good shot at making the team isn't as outlandish, nor is it "gushing" or "hyping". It's simply facts. Just look at the kids numbers and tell me I'm wrong. They're much better than you probably think. Also, if you paid attention I also acknowledge his case of the drops last year. So I'm not really "gushing" or "hyping". Please pay attention to what I'm saying before you speak, it makes you sound silly.


You compared his upside to Brandon Marshall. 'Nuff said. Realistically the only reason you even arrived at that premature idea is because of his size.

Quote:
As for bringing in competition for Henne, I feel like we should have gone after a quarterback in the draft after a dissapointing 3rd season. Not another re-tread in free agency. Moore was a re-tread and so was Orton. I didn't want either player. I was a big supporter of the idea that we draft Mallett. I think Mallett would have provided Henne with solid competition. If you paid attention then you would remember how much I wanted us to get Mallett. I too wanted competition for Henne, just not the kind you wanted.


But we didn't go after one in the draft, leading up to that point. The Pat White situation was a complete failure. Hence, all that was left to do was dig around free-agency or trades.

Quote:
Name a team that has won a Super Bowl with a free agent quarterback in the last ten years except Drew Brees and you'll see your arguement against going after franchise quarterbacks in the draft is a shaky one at best.


Drew Brees as already stated. Regardless, as bad as I wanna win a Super Bowl I understand that this is a team sport and there are capable free agents or trades that teams have made to find a QB to lead their team into being highly competitive as well as to the playoffs. Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner, Jake Delhomme are some signees that come to mind .... trade situations consists of the likes of Cutler, Schaub, etc.

Quote:
As for my flair for overstating Tannehill's abilities, I have done nothing more than say what every draft expert and our entire staff are saying about the kid. Also, if you think we're never going to start an 8th overall pick you're more naive than I thought, or you just choose to ignore the simple facts in front of you.


Who said never gonna start? You seem to be of the mind that it's a guarantee he's our future starter for years to come. He has proven nothing to warrant it. What, because you watched the famed "Jon Gruden QB Camp" video? LOL. Most of the pundits that you're parroting about his skill sets, also believe that he will get eaten alive by real defenses in the regular season if he's thrown into the fire right away. Do you just selectively pick and choose when you agree with those "experts"?

Quote:
Again, you keep calling me professor West Coast, but all I've done is put up articles and common knowledge facts that anyone with an internet browser could find themselves. If you think that makes me an expert, then maybe you should do a little surfing because the information is easy to find online.


I don't think you're an expert. Not even close to being one. Everything you mention when it comes to the WCO and how the players fit is a criminal oversimplification. It happens a lot in online forums when people substitute a couple articles for actual knowledge.

Quote:
I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that you were big on Thigpen, just like you were on Orton, and just like you are now about Moore. And still you're ignoring my statement about Moore being gone next year.


Big? Another superlative? Once again we go round and round with this. Henne needed competition and was never allowed to get any. Why would I not want Thigpen to get a fair shot? Why not Orton, who previously appeared to have more upside than Moore? I was glad I was wrong about Orton, as well as Moore originally ...... which is precisely why I feel Moore deserves a fair shot at the starting position. This is not hype. This is fact.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 4:54 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 26207
Location: Miami, FL
Iowafin wrote:
degs wrote:
Quote:
There is only one place you find franchise quarterbacks, and it usually isn't the free agency market, it's in the draft. Learn how to draft and develop quarterbacks or die. This is a quarterback driven league. If you don't know that by now them maybe you should turn on the news.


Yes, because that is where New Orleans got Drew Brees; the draft.
It is THE only place to get a franchise QB


name me another.


Matt Schaub via trade.

Michael Vick via free agency.

Matt Hasselback via trade.

All time great - Steve Young via trade.

The draft isn't the only place to do it.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:54 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
degs wrote:
Iowafin wrote:
degs wrote:
I was reponding to the statement that "There is only one place you find franchise quaterbacks"


You ignored the part directly after that that says "it usually isn't the free agency market." Brett Favre, I've heard of, and he was traded to Green Bay, not a free agent.


You ignore the fact that whether free agency or trade, I provided several examples that prove what you wrote to be incorrect.


What did I write that is incorrect?

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:56 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
Rich wrote:

Matt Schaub via trade.

Michael Vick via free agency.

Matt Hasselback via trade.

All time great - Steve Young via trade.

The draft isn't the only place to do it.


Michael Vick and Matt Schaub are franchise quarterbacks? A bit of a reach, but even so, wk's point was that you USUALLY do it through the draft.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 6:44 am 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10113
Location: MA
Iowafin wrote:
Rich wrote:

Matt Schaub via trade.

Michael Vick via free agency.

Matt Hasselback via trade.

All time great - Steve Young via trade.

The draft isn't the only place to do it.


Michael Vick and Matt Schaub are franchise quarterbacks? A bit of a reach, but even so, wk's point was that you USUALLY do it through the draft.


People have different definitions of what a franchise QB is. Just because a guy isn't top 5 or elite doesn't necessarily mean he isn't a franchise QB. When teams commit to a guy who has proven himself in one way or another and you can invest in him beyond a couple of years I think you have yourself a franchise QB. Vick, Schaub, Cutler, Romo, Flacco, Ryan...these are guys I think fall into that category. Any of them have the potential to take their team to a Super Bowl.

In a lot of cases I agree the draft is about the only way to go. Trades and FA occur when a team has two franchise caliber/potential guys. Favre/Chris Miller (I think he was their QB), Brees/Rivers, Schaub/Vick, Vick/Dogs/Ryan, Hasslebeck/Favre, etc.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 6:56 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 26207
Location: Miami, FL
Iowafin wrote:
Michael Vick and Matt Schaub are franchise quarterbacks? A bit of a reach, but even so, wk's point was that you USUALLY do it through the draft.


Maybe you could make an argument that Michael Vick isn't, particularly because his career was derailed by the dog fighting incident, but if you're questioning whether Matt Schaub is, then you haven't been paying attention to the Texans. The guy's passer rating is usually over 90, he is a Pro Bowler, he has thrown for over 4000 yards twice, would have done it again a third year in a row if not for injury, high completion percentage, part of a high powered offense, etc.

He is a top 10 QB in this league that can take over games.

Vick is the Eagles franchise QB, as evidenced by his 6 year, $100 million deal and the fact that as his fortunes go, so do the Eagles. He may not put up the stereotypical passing numbers, but what he can do from an athletic standpoint is unrivaled.

I agree that you usually find franchise QBs in the draft, but you asked for more names and you got them.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 8:37 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
Rich wrote:
Iowafin wrote:
Michael Vick and Matt Schaub are franchise quarterbacks? A bit of a reach, but even so, wk's point was that you USUALLY do it through the draft.


Maybe you could make an argument that Michael Vick isn't, particularly because his career was derailed by the dog fighting incident, but if you're questioning whether Matt Schaub is, then you haven't been paying attention to the Texans. The guy's passer rating is usually over 90, he is a Pro Bowler, he has thrown for over 4000 yards twice, would have done it again a third year in a row if not for injury, high completion percentage, part of a high powered offense, etc.

He is a top 10 QB in this league that can take over games.

Vick is the Eagles franchise QB, as evidenced by his 6 year, $100 million deal and the fact that as his fortunes go, so do the Eagles. He may not put up the stereotypical passing numbers, but what he can do from an athletic standpoint is unrivaled.

I agree that you usually find franchise QBs in the draft, but you asked for more names and you got them.


Yes, I'll give you Schaub, even though a rookie in Yates was able to win them their first ever playoff game.

I guess I wanted more names that came in free agency, but the point you're making is that not everyone comes from the draft. So we agree. Not every franchise quarterback comes from the draft, it's usually not via trade, and even more rare in free agency, but mostly through the draft.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 9:16 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 26207
Location: Miami, FL
Iowafin wrote:
Yes, I'll give you Schaub, even though a rookie in Yates was able to win them their first ever playoff game.

That game was won by the running game and the defense. 188 yards rushing, 4 sacks, 3 INTs.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 9:21 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
Rich wrote:
Iowafin wrote:
Yes, I'll give you Schaub, even though a rookie in Yates was able to win them their first ever playoff game.

That game was won by the running game and the defense. 188 yards rushing, 4 sacks, 3 INTs.


That it was...which is why I'm inclined to believe that Schaub rides his team, not the team rides Schaub.

I agree that Schaub is the Texans best chance to win at quarterback and I think they could have given New England a better run than Baltimore did if Schaub was there. So Schaub makes them better, but I'm not sure he's at that "franchise" level.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 26207
Location: Miami, FL
Iowafin wrote:
Rich wrote:
Iowafin wrote:
Yes, I'll give you Schaub, even though a rookie in Yates was able to win them their first ever playoff game.

That game was won by the running game and the defense. 188 yards rushing, 4 sacks, 3 INTs.


That it was...which is why I'm inclined to believe that Schaub rides his team, not the team rides Schaub.

I agree that Schaub is the Texans best chance to win at quarterback and I think they could have given New England a better run than Baltimore did if Schaub was there. So Schaub makes them better, but I'm not sure he's at that "franchise" level.


You could make that argument about almost any quarterback. How far did the Aaron Rodgers led Packers get with a 30th ranked defense?

What did Peyton Manning achieve all those years the Colts defense was porous and the run game non-existent?

How many Superbowls did Marino win with those Tom Oliva-no-Defense defenses and a putrid running game?

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 1:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
Rich wrote:
You could make that argument about almost any quarterback. How far did the Aaron Rodgers led Packers get with a 30th ranked defense?

What did Peyton Manning achieve all those years the Colts defense was porous and the run game non-existent?

How many Superbowls did Marino win with those Tom Oliva-no-Defense defenses and a putrid running game?


Peyton consistently won 12 games, Rodgers went 15-1 and we all know what Marino did. No, no championships, but that argument does not translate with Schaub. When Houston was in the bottom third of the league, the best Schaub could ever do was one game over .500. Last year, when they were 4th in the league, he went 7-3.

So I don't think you can make that argument.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 26207
Location: Miami, FL
Iowafin wrote:
Peyton consistently won 12 games, Rodgers went 15-1 and we all know what Marino did. No, no championships, but that argument does not translate with Schaub. When Houston was in the bottom third of the league, the best Schaub could ever do was one game over .500. Last year, when they were 4th in the league, he went 7-3.

So I don't think you can make that argument.


Sure I can. It's the old team game versus getting too much credit argument.

Peyton consistently won 12 games... with Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison and Edgerin James and Dwight Freeney and Dallas Clark...

Aaron Rodgers went 15-1 but that team was already competitive before he started. And Aaron Rodgers couldn't overcome 37 points from the Giants.

Everyone always says Marino would have multiple rings if he had played on the 49ers....

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
Rich wrote:
Iowafin wrote:
Peyton consistently won 12 games, Rodgers went 15-1 and we all know what Marino did. No, no championships, but that argument does not translate with Schaub. When Houston was in the bottom third of the league, the best Schaub could ever do was one game over .500. Last year, when they were 4th in the league, he went 7-3.

So I don't think you can make that argument.


Sure I can. It's the old team game versus getting too much credit argument.

Peyton consistently won 12 games... with Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison and Edgerin James and Dwight Freeney and Dallas Clark...

Aaron Rodgers went 15-1 but that team was already competitive before he started. And Aaron Rodgers couldn't overcome 37 points from the Giants.

Everyone always says Marino would have multiple rings if he had played on the 49ers....


Matt Schaub has Andre Johnson and a consistently good running game....... You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. At first you said those quarterbacks were winning despite their team, now you're saying they won because of them.

Matt Schaub is not at the level of any of those guys and never will be. You're making a poor argument.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:29 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
Iowafin wrote:
What did I write that is incorrect?


This entire discussion revolves around your incorrect statement: "There is only one place you find franchise quaterbacks"

You seem to be desperately arguing with everyone that you have some kind of point.

You don't.

Walk away from it. You can't win, because you are completely wrong.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:55 pm
Posts: 5439
degs wrote:
Iowafin wrote:
What did I write that is incorrect?


This entire discussion revolves around your incorrect statement: "There is only one place you find franchise quaterbacks"

You seem to be desperately arguing with everyone that you have some kind of point.

You don't.

Walk away from it. You can't win, because you are completely wrong.


If you actually read the threat you'd see that wkloiber13 said that. Not me. I'll wait for apology.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:34 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
Iowafin wrote:
If you actually read the threat you'd see that wkloiber13 said that. Not me. I'll wait for apology.


I apologize for that.
Now it's time for you to walk away from the argument.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:20 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
degs wrote:
Iowafin wrote:
What did I write that is incorrect?


This entire discussion revolves around your incorrect statement: "There is only one place you find franchise quaterbacks"

You seem to be desperately arguing with everyone that you have some kind of point.

You don't.

Walk away from it. You can't win, because you are completely wrong.


You're attacking my statement becuase you're taking it too literally in my opinion. But if you want to get into semantics then that's fine.

If you trade for a guy then you really didn't find him now did you??? The team that drafted that guy found him, not the team that traded for him. So there truly is only one place where a guy gets found, which is the draft. But this arguement isn't about semantics, it's about where teams within recent history find franchise quarterbacks.

The only player that fists the criteria I said earlier was Vick, and he is under the gun right now for poor performance. His career completion percentage is 56%, while he's no Tim Tebow in terms of his passing, he isn't Drew Brees either. Also, he's only played a complete season once, that too should be considered. While I'll admit Vick is an NFL star, I don't think he's elite nor do I think he'll ever win a Super Bowl. He also found himself playing for a different team out of strange circumstances. I think the Falcons would still have the guy if he wouldn't have been incarcerated.

As for Matt Schaub, he's only made the playoffs once and he didn't even play in the playoffs because he was sitting on the bench injured. I'm going to hold my judgement on the guy for at least a season or two more before I'll call the guy a franchise quarterback. Part of being a franchise quarterback means you have to actually win games, that means playoff games too. T.J. Yates has more playoff wins than Schaub, nuff said. Also, the Pro Bowl is a popularity contest and we all know it. Going to the Pro Bowl doesn't make you a franchise quarterback. It makes you popular with fantasy football guys.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:36 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
wkloiber13 wrote:
If you trade for a guy then you really didn't find him now did you??? The team that drafted that guy found him, not the team that traded for him.


Have to totally disagree with that concept. The team that learned to utilize him "found him."

That's why Tampa Bay didn't win Superbowls with Steve Young as their QB and Green Bay didn't win with Kurt Warner. Nor did Atlanta win with Brett Favre. And how many games did San Diego win with Eli at the helm?

So, yes, if you trade for a guy, or sign him off the waiver wire, you did "find him", generally after someone else "gave up on him."


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 9:32 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
degs wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
If you trade for a guy then you really didn't find him now did you??? The team that drafted that guy found him, not the team that traded for him.


Have to totally disagree with that concept. The team that learned to utilize him "found him."

That's why Tampa Bay didn't win Superbowls with Steve Young as their QB and Green Bay didn't win with Kurt Warner. Nor did Atlanta win with Brett Favre. And how many games did San Diego win with Eli at the helm?

So, yes, if you trade for a guy, or sign him off the waiver wire, you did "find him", generally after someone else "gave up on him."


The team that learned to utilize him "developed him", they didn't "find him". Again, I'm not trying to argue semantics with you, it's not the point at hand.

Here is my point as simply as I can make it: The first step to success in the NFL is finding a franchise quarterback in the draft. This is the current trend for winning championships in todays NFL.

One guy here and there may slip through and become successful despite the odds, but the stats are overwhelmingly in favor with what I've said. You draft a franchise quarterback prospect, you develop him, and you build a team around him. That is what wins in the NFL today.

Also, you keep going outside of the past ten years. I'm referring to recent history, which in my opinion is more indicative of what brings success in the here and now. Not things that happened well over a decade ago. So please stop talking about people outside of the last ten years because the game constantly evolves and changes, so to bring up things that happened that long ago is pointless in my opinion. If you cannot come up with players within the last ten years except Brees then I don't want to hear it.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 10:16 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
The past 10ish years is definitely more important but don't dismiss the lessons that happen before then. If you do you don't learn anything.

And I'll drop out of the discussion on QBs. What you think is your main point misses the entire point IMO. I'll leave it at that


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 5:17 am 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10113
Location: MA
wkloiber13 wrote:
The team that learned to utilize him "developed him", they didn't "find him". Again, I'm not trying to argue semantics with you, it's not the point at hand.


Using this logic there are no QBs who are "found" in the NFL because they were discovered, recruited, developed and groomed for the NFL by their college coach. Therefore they are known assets prior to their professional career. Whoever recognizes the opportunity and invests in it has found the guy.

Peyton Manning is about the only guy in the last decade that fits your description of "you find the franchise QB and then build around him" as a winning formula. The Patriots never built around Brady when they were winning. A lot of those guys were in place before he was considered a franchise guy. Big Ben stepped into a pre-built team and most of Rodgers' supporting cast was in place before he became dominant.

Team building is an ongoing process and you strike at certain positions when you see opportunity. There isn't some preset blueprint that teams should follow. Do you think the Bears are upset they traded for Jay Cutler rather than aggressively make a move for Mark Sanchez or Josh Freeman?


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2

All times are UTC-05:00


Phinfever Home Page

Phinfever Chatroom

Phinfever FAQ


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited | Chopped and modified by Coots | Original design by Prosk8r