Sleepers in 2014 NFL Draft

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

@tour2ma said:

I take Watkins... He is "Can't miss" IMO...

I do not have to prove anything about my or anyone else's view of Hoyer when he was signed. Your request is as ridiculous as me asking you to produce every post saying Hoyer was a waste of a roster spot to support your "no one" hyperbole.

I had no opinion of Hoyer when Lombardi signed him. But by the time Wheezy first went down and it was time for a backup to step in, I was all for Hoyer being the one vs. Campbell... based upon what I had seen of Hoyer in pre-season vs. what I knew of Campbell's past performance at Oakland and Washington.

I don't feel it's hyperbole. I've been combing the forum for posts dated before the season and haven't found a single one that claims Hoyer has the potential to be a starter.

[cdl15]

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

I don't feel it's hyperbole. I've been combing the forum for posts dated before the season and haven't found a single one that claims Hoyer has the potential to be a starter.

So...doubt Ull ever find one of DA before 07 and he was a probowler that year. Great analysis.

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

How many teams have two No. 1 WRs? Then, tell me where those teams finished this season.

How 'bout the 2007 Pats with Moss and Welker... As I recall they went 16-0...

Can't wait for your to tell me Welker was not a #1...

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

My whole point about what I wrote, is that no one valued Hoyer, at all, prove me wrong. He was "Lombardis boy" and on the outside looking in on the QB job from day 1.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

I don't feel it's hyperbole. I've been combing the forum for posts dated before the season and haven't found a single one that claims Hoyer has the potential to be a starter.

TC, his use of "no one" is the very defintion of hyperbole...

hy·per·bo·le (hī-pûr′bə-lē)

n.

A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

I like him, like his story, but I want a super bowl and I'm not sure he's good enough for the job. You don't know if Manziel, Bridgewater or Bortles are yet. You use that No. 1 pick on a QB when ypu have "We will have a CHAMPIONSHIP LEVEL QB" written on your draft office wall.

Yes, you do... IF you believe that one of those three QBs (or Carr or a true darkhorse) in the draft is a Championship level QB.

It seems you do..

I do not...

So rather than ridicule my choice of Watkins over your annointed trinity (which will only serve to piss me off) why not spend your time trying to convince me that one (or more) of those QBs is the guy...

... and in return I will try to convince you he is/ they are not...

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

@cdl15 said:

So...doubt Ull ever find one of DA before 07 and he was a probowler that year. Great analysis.

And what's he done since?

That's a perfect comparison, thank you.

God damn, it would be sad if it wasn't so funny.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

@tour2ma said:

TC, his use of "no one" is the very defintion of hyperbole...

hy·per·bo·le (hī-pûr′bə-lē)

n.

A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.

I know the definition of hyperbole. That's why I said I don't think it is. I literally can't find a single example of someone claiming him to be a starter.

[Tour2ma]

@tour2ma said:

Moss and Welker...

After a ittle more thought...

Perhaps a different Moss pairing... with Chris Carter?

... maybe Stallworth and Swan?

... or the Marks Brothers?

Just spitballing here...

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

No, that is not hyperbole, because I was being literal. If someone said Hoyer will be the 2014 starter, with conviction, prior to his start vs. Minnesota, I'll kindly retract.

Simmer down... you got the year wrong...

[Tour2ma]

Did anyone proclaim Wilson to be Seattle's savior when they drafted him?

I found this unexpected source prior to Hoyer's first start in Minnesota...

@shep said:

@shep said:

Lombardi was/is high on Hoyer because he seems to have the mental aspect: He can read a defense before AND after the snap. He doesn't have slow eyes. He goes through the progressions.

He isn't a high-end physical talent, to be sure. He has a mid-range arm and low-end wheels.

[Tour2ma]

Also found...

@calfoxwc said:

Weeden had his chance this year to show he can see the field. He just doesn't, by NFL standards.

Sure, any qb can eventually, in terms of several seconds (see big stupid ben)...

but the ability to comprehensively see the field, and understand what is going on, and make quick decisions..

doesn't have anything to do with the big NFL arm. Sure, it was preseason, but Hoyer still sees it.

And I underestimated his arm strength a whole lot. Just saw that Hoyer is the man a few minutes ago.

Really smart move. Campbell doesn't see it any better than Weeden, and his passes didn't have zip.

Hoyer is going to come into that game, and show the difference in QB mind vs Big Arm. There aren't

many Brian Sipes or Bernie Kosars around for the Browns. And Hoyers ball placement is really, really smart.

Do I have to find more or does two adequately disprove "no one"?

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

No sir, what I'm talking about is how no one--literally--had no idea this guy was going to come in and do anything positive. There was no expectation. No one watched his film, and said, "hey guys, I think this Hoyer signing might hve finally landed us our quarterback."

No, you watched two games--one against a terrible Minnesota defense that ranked 31st in the NFL in pass defense (and only 12 interceptions all season, Hoyer threw 3 of them), and another against Cincy, which is a game the defense clearly won.

Hoyer left points on the field against the Bengals, Campbell put up more than 17 on them.

As I have shown, at least two posts looked positively upon Hoyer starting over Campbell prior to the MN game. Claiming that a lack of folks not being on his bandwagon from his signing is a statement without merit... unless it is hyperbole... in which case it would at least serve a purpose.

I watched Hoyer start three games.

Game 1:

I saw a nervous QB getting his chance who nonetheless was decisive and sharp... excepting that he failed to account for underneath LBs ifor a couple throws. But I saw a QB who competed and put points on the board against an NFL defense and ultimately outscored a team we had issues keeping from scoring.

Game 2:

I saw a QB who in the face our the best Defensive effort of the season, first insured that he would not lose the game, but when Cinci closed to within 4 points in the 2nd half opened up enough to drive us to a game clinching TD.

His line for the game:

Game 3:

I saw a QB who was off to a good 2-4 start before being injured.

Bottom line:

I saw a mature, improving NFL QB. I saw enough to not feel that I have to risk a precious first round pick on the off chance that one of the "top" QBs in the 2014 will take me further than Hoyer can.

I'll admit I was skeptical about Hoyer and was even hoping Wheezy might recover and start the MN game... but I saw a leadership spark in Hoyer in preseason... and I said so...

@tour2ma said:

Leadership? God knows we need some on the Offense. I know I thought I saw a bit of a spark in preseason.

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

You're getting slightly annoying.

As are you... sorry if I only read what you wrote and not between your lines...

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

I found one person who said Hoyer would not only make the team, but he could "See a situation in which Hoyer starts"... He has 16 posts, and probably hasn't looked at this board since.

So there you go, I was using hyperbole. Blow me.

C'mon, Mike... that's beneath you...

[Tour2ma]

I am posting what I think...

Stick to facts, make a logical argument and so will I...

Start name-calling, which I will not stoop to, and we're done...

Your call...

[J0hnnybg00d]

Hoyer, Bridgewater, and Bortles are good... Manziel sucks. Why would anyone want a streetballer to play for the Browns? This is Manziel in the huddle " Ok guys i don't have any idea what the defense is doing...so snap me the ball and i'll run around till someone gets open or i'll just run it myself and drop my shoulder and run over linebackers". He's more clueless than Weedone but can run. I was once blinded by his legs/heart and thought he was the man,but as a Brownsfan i don't want clueless behind center anymore. Read the week 3 and 4 game impressions if you want to understand the Hoyer love. We went from "its over" to "hey we can win". We went from thinking the team sucked except for a couple guys to thinking that the team was good and only a smart QB away from having something. Seems like only the writers and bloggers put Hoyer down in order to show off their new college QB thats gunna take us to the promise land. At least name a QB thats smarter than he is fast.

[bbedward]

@mike-h said:

After hi-jacking this thread enough, which was a good discussion about draft sleepers, I'm going to say this before leaving:

How many teams need quarterbacks this season? There is going to be a "run" on them early on, and I'm starting to lean in Bridgewater's direction as the best prospect available. I was liking Bortles after watching a couple of his games, but after watching a few more last night I think he's not great at any one thing. Average arm, good mobility, does make progressions, but he doesn't look like he sees the game as fast as TB or even JF.

After watching 8+ games of each, I see it:

1a. Bridgewater

1b. Manziel

2. Bortles

Derek Carr would not be No. 3 unless others really fail to impress me. Am not a fan, but that's well-known I think.

If both TB and Manziel are gone, I don't know if I'd take Bortles or anyone else with the No. 4 pick, and actually do it your way by taking a QB later. I could get behind a trade of some kind, but which direction do they go? If Clowney, Manziel and TB are all off the board, I would think about trading down or taking Watkins, I guess, because he will be a good-great NFL receiver--I don't doubt that.

The only question I have now is whether I would trade up for either of those two quarterbacks.

And I'm not sure. Good thing it's early February.

This is one thing I can partially agree on. I think Teddy B is the best and most NFL ready QB prospect in this draft. Manziel is too risky IMO.

Worth trading up for him? Too early to be seen. Right now I'm inclined to say no for what it'd probably cost. I don't believe the Manziel/Houston hype all that much. I think if they do end up taking Manziel then the Jags have a good chance of taking him or at least strongly considering taking him.

That's why I'm on the Watkins/Clowney/Garappolo side of things

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

If Clowney, Manziel and TB are all off the board, I would think about trading down or taking Watkins, I guess, because he will be a good-great NFL receiver--I don't doubt that.

Good stuff... and nothing I can argue with... dammit...

But only because as far as that analysis goes we end up in the same place... no QB drafted at #4, but maybe my precious...

Now quit making me derail my own thread...

Meanwhile, ya gots any sleepers?

[Tour2ma]

@mike-h said:

Sorry for being a dick, but I'm kind of an asshole sometimes.

Me, too...

But at least we're two of the more literate assholes on the board...

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

@tour2ma said:

Me, too...

But at least we're two of the more literate assholes on the board...

*literal