#4 #22
-
The only elite QBs on this list are Roethlisberger, Manning, Brady, Brees, and Rodgers. Manning is the only QB that was a top 10 pick and 2 of the 5 were not drafted in the 1st round. That tells me picking a QB in the early in the 1st round can work but is definitely not the only way to get a franchise QB. Plus the sample size is so small it's hard to draw too many conclusions..
To use the word elite leaves things open to interpretation. I'm going by pure facts of this years stats. And the sample size is the top 10 QB's out of 32. How many do you wish I provide?
jparsh said:
To use the word elite leaves things open to interpretation. I'm going by pure facts of this years stats. And the sample size is the top 10 QB's out of 32. How many do you wish I provide?
Well you keep saying "top 10." Top 10 in what: yards? touchdowns? QBR? TD to INT ratio? Plus you only include this year's stats. If you are going to make a blanket statement, you need a larger sample size. So you need to include more years in your analysis and state what stats you are using to come to your conclusions. Everything is too vague.
The QB position is clearly the most important in the game. I'm not disputing that. But you give the QBs all the credit and ignore all the great playmakers they have to work with. Super Bowl caliber teams have a franchise QB surrounded by good WRs, RBs, OL and a great defense. There are few exceptions. And just like the QB can be measured using several different stats, so can the defense: takeaways, yards allowed, ect.
-
jparsh said:
To use the word elite leaves things open to interpretation. I'm going by pure facts of this years stats. And the sample size is the top 10 QB's out of 32. How many do you wish I provide?
Well you keep saying "top 10." Top 10 in what: yards? touchdowns? QBR? TD to INT ratio? Plus you only include this year's stats. If you are going to make a blanket statement, you need a larger sample size. So you need to include more years in your analysis and state what stats you are using to come to your conclusions. Everything is too vague.
The QB position is clearly the most important in the game. I'm not disputing that. But you give the QBs all the credit and ignore all the great playmakers they have to work with. Super Bowl caliber teams have a franchise QB surrounded by good WRs, RBs, OL and a great defense. There are few exceptions. And just like the QB can be measured using several different stats, so can the defense: takeaways, yards allowed, ect.
Well you keep saying "top 10." Top 10 in what: yards? touchdowns? QBR? TD to INT ratio? Plus you only include this year's stats. If you are going to make a blanket statement, you need a larger sample size. So you need to include more years in your analysis and state what stats you are using to come to your conclusions. Everything is too vague.
The QB position is clearly the most important in the game. I'm not disputing that. But you give the QBs all the credit and ignore all the great playmakers they have to work with. Super Bowl caliber teams have a franchise QB surrounded by good WRs, RBs, OL and a great defense. There are few exceptions. And just like the QB can be measured using several different stats, so can the defense: takeaways, yards allowed, ect.
I used QB rating. That is the end all be all of a quarterbacks performance.
Well, I went back to last year and the only names that are different in the top 10 are:
Rivers...1st round pick
Vick (POS)....1st round pick
Freeman....1st round pick
Flacco....1st round pick
Cassell....7th round
Peyton manning...1st round pick
So last year there were more 1st round picks in the top 10.
-
Well you keep saying "top 10." Top 10 in what: yards? touchdowns? QBR? TD to INT ratio? Plus you only include this year's stats. If you are going to make a blanket statement, you need a larger sample size. So you need to include more years in your analysis and state what stats you are using to come to your conclusions. Everything is too vague.
The QB position is clearly the most important in the game. I'm not disputing that. But you give the QBs all the credit and ignore all the great playmakers they have to work with. Super Bowl caliber teams have a franchise QB surrounded by good WRs, RBs, OL and a great defense. There are few exceptions. And just like the QB can be measured using several different stats, so can the defense: takeaways, yards allowed, ect.
I used QB rating. That is the end all be all of a quarterbacks performance.
Well, I went back to last year and the only names that are different in the top 10 are:
Rivers...1st round pick
Vick (POS)....1st round pick
Freeman....1st round pick
Flacco....1st round pick
Cassell....7th round
Peyton manning...1st round pick
So last year there were more 1st round picks in the top 10.
jparsh said:
I used QB rating. That is the end all be all of a quarterbacks performance.
Well, I went back to last year and the only names that are different in the top 10 are:
Rivers...1st round pick
Vick (POS)....1st round pick
Freeman....1st round pick
Flacco....1st round pick
Cassell....7th round
Peyton manning...1st round pick
So last year there were more 1st round picks in the top 10.
Such an "end all-be all" statistic that ESPN had to invent a new one, right?
The passer rating is garbage. The Total QBR, while being slightly better than the passer rating, is still garbage. Neither stat are end all be all ways of measuring QB's.
A QB who goes 30-30 for 1000 yards and 0 TD's has the exact same rating as a QB who goes 1-1 for 1 yard and a TD. And neither of those ratings are close to perfect.
It's a flawed system.
-
jparsh said:
I used QB rating. That is the end all be all of a quarterbacks performance.
Well, I went back to last year and the only names that are different in the top 10 are:
Rivers...1st round pick
Vick (POS)....1st round pick
Freeman....1st round pick
Flacco....1st round pick
Cassell....7th round
Peyton manning...1st round pick
So last year there were more 1st round picks in the top 10.
Such an "end all-be all" statistic that ESPN had to invent a new one, right?
The passer rating is garbage. The Total QBR, while being slightly better than the passer rating, is still garbage. Neither stat are end all be all ways of measuring QB's.
A QB who goes 30-30 for 1000 yards and 0 TD's has the exact same rating as a QB who goes 1-1 for 1 yard and a TD. And neither of those ratings are close to perfect.
It's a flawed system.
Such an "end all-be all" statistic that ESPN had to invent a new one, right?
The passer rating is garbage. The Total QBR, while being slightly better than the passer rating, is still garbage. Neither stat are end all be all ways of measuring QB's.
A QB who goes 30-30 for 1000 yards and 0 TD's has the exact same rating as a QB who goes 1-1 for 1 yard and a TD. And neither of those ratings are close to perfect.
It's a flawed system.
It's better than being able to take stats out of context. And the last time I checked, to make certain lists you have to meet minimum criteria. Much like in basketball where a leader in 3pt % has to have X number of attempts to count. So your sorry excuse for a counter doesn't really hold any weight. QB rating adds together attempts/completions/yards/TD's/INT's That encompasses everything, in other words, perfect system.
-
So you're telling me that if the minimum requirement of attempts is 5, and a QB that goes 4 for 4 for 400 yards and 4 TDs every game but has a less than perfect rating is a worse QB than one who goes 15 for 20 for 200 yards and 2 TDs with the exact same TOP?
That's why nobody respects you. Because you're a fucking idiot.
-
So you're telling me that if the minimum requirement of attempts is 5, and a QB that goes 4 for 4 for 400 yards and 4 TDs every game but has a less than perfect rating is a worse QB than one who goes 15 for 20 for 200 yards and 2 TDs with the exact same TOP?
That's why nobody respects you. Because you're a fucking idiot.
So you're telling me that if the minimum requirement of attempts is 5, and a QB that goes 4 for 4 for 400 yards and 4 TDs every game but has a less than perfect rating is a worse QB than one who goes 15 for 20 for 200 yards and 2 TDs with the exact same TOP?
That's why nobody respects you. Because you're a fucking idiot.
Hey dumbshit, is the minimum 5 attempts??? They set the minimum based on the average attempts of the other players. So if the other players averaged around 5 passes, then it would all be relative. It's not rocket science. I'd hate to see you become anything when you grow up, that would be scary to think that you'd be in charge of anything above bagging my rootbeer at the grocery store.
-
So you're telling me that if the minimum requirement of attempts is 5, and a QB that goes 4 for 4 for 400 yards and 4 TDs every game but has a less than perfect rating is a worse QB than one who goes 15 for 20 for 200 yards and 2 TDs with the exact same TOP?
That's why nobody respects you. Because you're a fucking idiot.
Hey dumbshit, is the minimum 5 attempts??? They set the minimum based on the average attempts of the other players. So if the other players averaged around 5 passes, then it would all be relative. It's not rocket science. I'd hate to see you become anything when you grow up, that would be scary to think that you'd be in charge of anything above bagging my rootbeer at the grocery store.
jparsh said:
Hey dumbshit, is the minimum 5 attempts??? They set the minimum based on the average attempts of the other players. So if the other players averaged around 5 passes, then it would all be relative. It's not rocket science. I'd hate to see you become anything when you grow up, that would be scary to think that you'd be in charge of anything above bagging my rootbeer at the grocery store.
That's why it was a hypothetical situation, cocknozzle.
But, once again, avoiding the point at hand by insulting me. You're so predictable, it's ridiculous. An Internet hillbilly fuckwit who thinks he knows everything yet constantly gets his garbage opinions shot down. You're the reason Al Gore invented the Internet in his basement after pork slamming that loose hussie you call a mother.
-
jparsh said:
Hey dumbshit, is the minimum 5 attempts??? They set the minimum based on the average attempts of the other players. So if the other players averaged around 5 passes, then it would all be relative. It's not rocket science. I'd hate to see you become anything when you grow up, that would be scary to think that you'd be in charge of anything above bagging my rootbeer at the grocery store.
That's why it was a hypothetical situation, cocknozzle.
But, once again, avoiding the point at hand by insulting me. You're so predictable, it's ridiculous. An Internet hillbilly fuckwit who thinks he knows everything yet constantly gets his garbage opinions shot down. You're the reason Al Gore invented the Internet in his basement after pork slamming that loose hussie you call a mother.
That's why it was a hypothetical situation, cocknozzle.
But, once again, avoiding the point at hand by insulting me. You're so predictable, it's ridiculous. An Internet hillbilly fuckwit who thinks he knows everything yet constantly gets his garbage opinions shot down. You're the reason Al Gore invented the Internet in his basement after pork slamming that loose hussie you call a mother.
LMAO You're pretty pissed that I made you look stupid. The fact of the matter is...let me talk s-l-o-w for you. The QB rating is the perfect situation for judging the performance of a QB. It takes into account your completions/attempts/yards/TD's/INT's
For you to be listed on the list that I was referencing, you had to have X number attempts. Right there anything you say in relation to it not being fair because one guy can have 100 attempts and the other guy can have 1 attempt is moot. You can't dabble in hypotheticals because this isn't hypothetical, this is factual.
Do you understand now?
-
Hey yo, what do you guys think about the top sack leader in the country declaring for this years draft? I think he's a senior and his name rhymes with merciless I think it's Mercilious. Would he and Jaball Sheard make a good tandem at LE n RE? And where do you think he falls in the draft? He would have to be a first rounder wouldn't he? Would he fall to us at 22 do you think?
-
That's why it was a hypothetical situation, cocknozzle.
But, once again, avoiding the point at hand by insulting me. You're so predictable, it's ridiculous. An Internet hillbilly fuckwit who thinks he knows everything yet constantly gets his garbage opinions shot down. You're the reason Al Gore invented the Internet in his basement after pork slamming that loose hussie you call a mother.
LMAO You're pretty pissed that I made you look stupid. The fact of the matter is...let me talk s-l-o-w for you. The QB rating is the perfect situation for judging the performance of a QB. It takes into account your completions/attempts/yards/TD's/INT's
For you to be listed on the list that I was referencing, you had to have X number attempts. Right there anything you say in relation to it not being fair because one guy can have 100 attempts and the other guy can have 1 attempt is moot. You can't dabble in hypotheticals because this isn't hypothetical, this is factual.
Do you understand now?
jparsh said:
LMAO You're pretty pissed that I made you look stupid. The fact of the matter is...let me talk s-l-o-w for you. The QB rating is the perfect situation for judging the performance of a QB. It takes into account your completions/attempts/yards/TD's/INT's
For you to be listed on the list that I was referencing, you had to have X number attempts. Right there anything you say in relation to it not being fair because one guy can have 100 attempts and the other guy can have 1 attempt is moot. You can't dabble in hypotheticals because this isn't hypothetical, this is factual.
Do you understand now?
Once again,
You would leave a QB off your list because he doesn't meet the minimum requirement for attempts?
I don't understand how this doesn't make sense to you.
-
hey jparsh: calm the fxxk down.
nobody on here ever said they want to kick your ass.
IMO you shoulda just come on here a little less 'strong'?
like i said before, we all get the fact that you want the browns to take RG3. jeez. slow down a bit and let it go. how many months until the draft?
but i will tell you one thing. if that's a picture of you in your sig.....you ain't scarin nobody. as a matter of fact i wouldn't even waste a plastic cup full of tap beer to throw in your face.
i'll just sit at the end of the bar chirpin "richard neener wants a weiner".
AND......
rick santorum needs some volunteers for his crusade against women. and with that pic you could be leading the way.
-
and RGlll is an elite nfl qb?
what are you his agent or just his 'down low' butt buddy?
it's amazing how you've hijacked all these threads and turned them into an anti-colt and pro manlove rgiii threads.
I always suspected that Cleveland sports fans were the dumbest in the country, but this place proves it. You people are against picking a QB with great potential with the 4th pick but you people would rather have who? Blackmon? Richardson? Who? Who are we supposed to take in order to help the Browns win a super bowl? Do RB's win super Bowls? NO. Do WR's win super Bowls? No.
If we continue with this Colt experiment for one more year (which I've got money on it that we won't) and we build up the offense around him and end up going 7-9 next season. Then that wins Colt yet another year and the next year we go 10-6 and make the playoffs. Then we're almost stuck with this kid who doesn't have the skill set to compare to Rogers or Manning to name a couple. Then we decide that he's not winning us anything, but our record is only good enough to get us the 22nd pick in the draft. Now instead of getting the 1st or 2nd best QB in a draft, we're stuck drafting a 3rd or even 4th best QB in a draft. Therefore that sticks us in the rut of mediocrity for years to come. Great teams place their QB in position and then get late round talent to build around them. That's how a team is built.
jparsh said:
I always suspected that Cleveland sports fans were the dumbest in the country, but this place proves it. You people are against picking a QB with great potential with the 4th pick but you people would rather have who? Blackmon? Richardson? Who? Who are we supposed to take in order to help the Browns win a super bowl? Do RB's win super Bowls? NO. Do WR's win super Bowls? No.
If we continue with this Colt experiment for one more year (which I've got money on it that we won't) and we build up the offense around him and end up going 7-9 next season. Then that wins Colt yet another year and the next year we go 10-6 and make the playoffs. Then we're almost stuck with this kid who doesn't have the skill set to compare to Rogers or Manning to name a couple. Then we decide that he's not winning us anything, but our record is only good enough to get us the 22nd pick in the draft. Now instead of getting the 1st or 2nd best QB in a draft, we're stuck drafting a 3rd or even 4th best QB in a draft. Therefore that sticks us in the rut of mediocrity for years to come. Great teams place their QB in position and then get late round talent to build around them. That's how a team is built.
FWIW, I don't see one read spread option qbs (Dave Kingler) making a big imprint in the NFL either.
Now, cool your jets- MUUUUUSSSSTTTTT have RG III. Really? Dalton sucked for the Bengals, and that's just this year, second round kiddo. Marino lasted until the last pick of the first, Brees was high second- Farve was second round, Aaron freaking Rodgers was the 24th pick FYI, want me to keep going?
Seriously, ESPN's Clayton was sucking Sanchez's schlong, and Mark had Holmes and Burress as his wide outs, not Little and Massaquoi.
-
Would love to think that Cleveland sure's up the WR position first and foremost with the draft. I don't know if Colt McCoy is the guy, but I just don't think we can continue to draft qb after qb when we don't have a right side of our OL and our receiver's almost lead the league in drops. We need to add some talent to the offense before we start analyzing McCoy to say whether he is a solid NFL qb or not. If you look to the best teams in the league, the only two teams built around running backs right now are the Ravens and the Niners and even they have playmakers at WR that can stretch a defense in Boldin/Smith and Crabtree. Little has yet to be that guy, and even if he turns out he will need some help. So for all intents and purposes I see the Browns certainly going to Blackmon if he manages to slip to number four, and I'm certainly hoping so. If not I'd like to see them either trade the pick or take Claiborne who would sure up our team at cb for years to come and then take the best available wr with pick 22.
I was just curious as to everyone elses thoughts on this topic, but I was really upset a couple years back when the Browns passed on LeSean McCoy when he was still on the board, and from the looks of things another back that could easily fit the skat back mold of the west coast offense and be a play maker akin to reggie bush/darren sproles/lesean mccoy is LaMichael James. I really like the idea of the Browns picking this guy up as early as the third round if he's available and although I know we certainly have to fill some other positions I can't help of think of how good of a compliment he would be to our offense especially with how often qb's check-down to the rb in the WCO. Hillis has great hands, but once he gets the ball his playmaking abilities aren't like that of a LM James. Thoughts?
-
jparsh said:
I always suspected that Cleveland sports fans were the dumbest in the country, but this place proves it. You people are against picking a QB with great potential with the 4th pick but you people would rather have who? Blackmon? Richardson? Who? Who are we supposed to take in order to help the Browns win a super bowl? Do RB's win super Bowls? NO. Do WR's win super Bowls? No.
If we continue with this Colt experiment for one more year (which I've got money on it that we won't) and we build up the offense around him and end up going 7-9 next season. Then that wins Colt yet another year and the next year we go 10-6 and make the playoffs. Then we're almost stuck with this kid who doesn't have the skill set to compare to Rogers or Manning to name a couple. Then we decide that he's not winning us anything, but our record is only good enough to get us the 22nd pick in the draft. Now instead of getting the 1st or 2nd best QB in a draft, we're stuck drafting a 3rd or even 4th best QB in a draft. Therefore that sticks us in the rut of mediocrity for years to come. Great teams place their QB in position and then get late round talent to build around them. That's how a team is built.
FWIW, I don't see one read spread option qbs (Dave Kingler) making a big imprint in the NFL either.
Now, cool your jets- MUUUUUSSSSTTTTT have RG III. Really? Dalton sucked for the Bengals, and that's just this year, second round kiddo. Marino lasted until the last pick of the first, Brees was high second- Farve was second round, Aaron freaking Rodgers was the 24th pick FYI, want me to keep going?
Seriously, ESPN's Clayton was sucking Sanchez's schlong, and Mark had Holmes and Burress as his wide outs, not Little and Massaquoi.
FWIW, I don't see one read spread option qbs (Dave Kingler) making a big imprint in the NFL either.
Now, cool your jets- MUUUUUSSSSTTTTT have RG III. Really? Dalton sucked for the Bengals, and that's just this year, second round kiddo. Marino lasted until the last pick of the first, Brees was high second- Farve was second round, Aaron freaking Rodgers was the 24th pick FYI, want me to keep going?
Seriously, ESPN's Clayton was sucking Sanchez's schlong, and Mark had Holmes and Burress as his wide outs, not Little and Massaquoi.
Seriously though. If a WR like Holmes is only getting 800 yards receiving a season with their running game, something is seriously messed up with the QB. Even say what you want about Edwards but as a #1 #2 option with an above average QB and the guy should be getting at least 1000 yards, shit he did it with Anderson. If Sanchez can't get it done with the weapons he had he isn't worth it. Sanchez just finished his 4th season and he had as many turnovers as TD. That's not a good sign. If McCoy can do what he did with what he had here and have similar numbers in his 2nd season with a brand new system and no training camp, then why would you want Sanchez.
PS I also think that it is really funny that all the jets players were calling out McElroy for talking about the looker room culture, and then they turn right around and confirm basically everything he said.
-
Are you a Clevelander? People have accused you of being a Steeler fan, am I wrong? Please correct me if I am mistaken. I would not want to place any sort of harsh judgment upon you if that is not the case. If it is the case, then no judgment can be harsh enough.
I think I'm the only Clevelander in this whole place. Everyone else claims to be from all over the east coast. I'm involved in a couple of the downtown revitalization projects. I would never leave Cleveland, love this place.
jparsh said:
I think I'm the only Clevelander in this whole place. Everyone else claims to be from all over the east coast. I'm involved in a couple of the downtown revitalization projects. I would never leave Cleveland, love this place.
OK, sorry about the mistake. When you say you are the only "Clevelander" what do you mean by that? I live in NE Ohio, though I don't live within the confines of the boundary of the City of Cleveland.
At one time I did...lived work and went to school all within Cleveland proper, but not now. Does that disqualify me?
-
Found this from The Reverend:
If Cleveland wants Richardson then I would like them to trade the number 4 pick to Washington (assuming Washington does not trade it with the Rams for RGIII) for RGIII. OR we take RGIII and trade him to Washington.
THen at the 6th pick (Washingtons) take Richardson...pick up the 6th overall in the second round putting us picking 5th and 6th in the second round.
With the 22nd pick take Burfict...he is right for that slot and the idea of DQ, Gocong, and Burfict as the lbers is very intriguing.
Take the 37th pick with the 38th pick (from Washington trade) to get back into the first round and take Mercilus DE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This make to much sense not to share it! I would love this draft. Then do some wheeling and dealing to land Minnifield in the second, somehow...
-
After hearing Heckert today I'm starting to think the Browns may trade down from #4 and go defense with both picks in the first.
Then with possibly 5 or 6 picks in rounds 2-4 address the offense with most of them, which I would not mind at all.
It all depends on how bad Washington/Miami would want rg3 and what St Louis would demand for the #2.
If for some reason St Louis does not trade down with Miami or Washington our 4 pick is going to get a lot more valuable.
I'm against trading up to #2 to get rg3 and taking Richardson at 4.
Here's the Heckert interview http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2012/01/12/browns-gm-tom-heckert-joins-bull-fox-2
-
After hearing Heckert today I'm starting to think the Browns may trade down from #4 and go defense with both picks in the first.
Then with possibly 5 or 6 picks in rounds 2-4 address the offense with most of them, which I would not mind at all.
It all depends on how bad Washington/Miami would want rg3 and what St Louis would demand for the #2.
If for some reason St Louis does not trade down with Miami or Washington our 4 pick is going to get a lot more valuable.
I'm against trading up to #2 to get rg3 and taking Richardson at 4.
Here's the Heckert interview http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2012/01/12/browns-gm-tom-heckert-joins-bull-fox-2
After hearing Heckert today I'm starting to think the Browns may trade down from #4 and go defense with both picks in the first.
Then with possibly 5 or 6 picks in rounds 2-4 address the offense with most of them, which I would not mind at all.
It all depends on how bad Washington/Miami would want rg3 and what St Louis would demand for the #2.
If for some reason St Louis does not trade down with Miami or Washington our 4 pick is going to get a lot more valuable.
I'm against trading up to #2 to get rg3 and taking Richardson at 4.
Here's the Heckert interview http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2012/01/12/browns-gm-tom-heckert-joins-bull-fox-2
Trading picks to go to #2 spot is a bad idea. Trading down is better- But not soo much that we lose a chance to draft any good and safe picks.
-
I really wouldn't mind taking Claiborne with our first rounder. Two shutdown corners is lethal in the NFL. Makes your pass rush twice as good.
-
I really wouldn't mind taking Claiborne with our first rounder. Two shutdown corners is lethal in the NFL. Makes your pass rush twice as good.
I really wouldn't mind taking Claiborne with our first rounder. Two shutdown corners is lethal in the NFL. Makes your pass rush twice as good.
Well the mock draft does have us taking another CB -> Minnifield.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login