PFT: Browns will try for Mariota or Bradford (again)
-
a condensed version for those that care:
mariota is smart (my A #1 concern when drafting a QB).
has got all the measureables desired by NFL squads. (big, tall, fast w/great arm)
is a humble 'face of a franchise' guy.
no i wouldn't trade up for him unless it was a nudge pick from a later round to go up one spot but IMO he just out-classes this dipshit:
-
Boy the 2014-15 bowl season was really a godsend for people arguing against the SEC. In our worst year in almost a decade, we still turn out the second best conference record in bowl games. And in about eight years running we've had the best. I'll address the rest of your arguments later but the SEC is MUCH better and MUCH more intimidating.
The Pac 12 having what is regarded as the best NCAA stadium means nothing. I don't have to tell you as a South Carolina fan, but we've got 8 stadiums that seat over 80,000 people. 4 over 100K. There are 2 over 80K in the Pac 12. Don't try to hit me with the Rose Bowl.
I'd love to see where you saw Ohio State had the third best SOS. They played no one in non-con. The conference wasn't strong. I must be forgetting a game.
I'll address the rest later.
-
well it's pretty sad that a team from the one of the best conf. in NCAA football and the BEST conf. in NCAA basketball can be made to look like shit from an SECer when they crushed a team that beat their team in THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.
exactly how does that work again?
-
if you take a look at the 2 schools (ohio state and A and M) how many sanctioned NCAA sports teams do each field every year?
hmmm.
something like 24 for OSU and 7 for A and M?
get back to me when you guys learn how to freeze water and learn how to skate on it.
-
Don't bother addressing the rest. We both have our opinions and I'm not really into reading about how you went to an A&M game once and that you know that it's much better than a game in Eugene.
As for Ohio State: http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team
-
Don't bother addressing the rest. We both have our opinions and I'm not really into reading about how you went to an A&M game once and that you know that it's much better than a game in Eugene.
As for Ohio State: http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team
Don't bother addressing the rest. We both have our opinions and I'm not really into reading about how you went to an A&M game once and that you know that it's much better than a game in Eugene.
As for Ohio State: http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team
Eugene is Mariota's home so even if I stipulate that it's the most intimidating stadium in the country, Mariota hasn't experienced its intimidating form.
5 of the top 10 from the SEC. The chart pretty much makes my point (even though I don't believe in those SOS charts). But as for OSU, they got credit for playing more games and in the context of our discussion (me saying SOS schedules don't matter and pointing to OSU-Oregon as an example), I'd have to see the rankings from the week before they played the game.
But again, going 10-2 in less competitive leagues is not equivalent to going 10-2 in a more competitive league. As far as I know, those charts don't factor that. Which is why it comes down to fan support, money, NFL players produced, inter conference game records, eye test, etc.
-
if you take a look at the 2 schools (ohio state and A and M) how many sanctioned NCAA sports teams do each field every year?
hmmm.
something like 24 for OSU and 7 for A and M?
get back to me when you guys learn how to freeze water and learn how to skate on it.
if you take a look at the 2 schools (ohio state and A and M) how many sanctioned NCAA sports teams do each field every year?
hmmm.
something like 24 for OSU and 7 for A and M?
get back to me when you guys learn how to freeze water and learn how to skate on it.
This is a discussion about football so that's not really relevant, although A&M had 7 or 8 NCs in non-revenue sports in the last 5 years.
-
not relevant but since you want to tout your school:
and then of course there is THE ohio state buckeyes:
BAM!!
-
i agree 100%.
BUT
if he does fall to 12 w/o any need to trade up, would you take him or kevin white or shelton if they were there? that's the real tricky part. a QB with question marks or a NT with less question marks?
Yeah- we probably take him at #12 Mik. However, the odds of him still being there @ #12 are about as good as me getting a date with Kate Upton.
-
not relevant but since you want to tout your school:
and then of course there is THE ohio state buckeyes:
BAM!!
-
Quarterbacks don't start more than two years all that often in college, so I'm not sure what your point is. Is Tampa Bay taking "a huge gamble" by taking Winston who only started two years? Petty only started two years.... and since Tannehill had only two years QB experience at the collegiate level Miami took a huge gamble. Wait... I already said that.
I'd love to see a stat about how many active NFL players were QBs through grade school.
Only comment I'll make on your running MM vs. JM discussion with TC... what their tape shows me is that one QB is far superior in operating within the scheme of an offense. The other made a name off improvisation.
I prefer the QB that can operate within a system.
lol... Point was I was trying to make it harder to pick MM over Shelton whose odds of being a stud are very high. And even at 50/50, which is as low as I think his odds are for attaining "franchise QB" status, I see Mariota getting the nod in that scenario. Such is the weight of the position.
Actually I'd put MM's odds much higher... maybe as high as 70/30.
Yes, Mariota ran the system better. But again, the system itself is run better on its own already. Johnny was in the first and second year of a new regime running a vastly different offense than the one Mike Sherman did. Oregon promoted the OC when Chip Kelly left. There's more continuity there, the players know the system better, and AGAIN, no comparison in competition! Zilch.
Playing the same comp in an Oregon uniform, is there any doubt Johnny would have had pretty much the same numbers?
I'll see this again too, if great stats are all that matters, then let's just keep a pipeline to wherever Mike Leach is coaching and whenever he has a QB that keeps the interceptions down (which is pretty much all of them), we can go get him.
Quarterbacks don't start more than two years all that often in college, so I'm not sure what your point is. Is Tampa Bay taking "a huge gamble" by taking Winston who only started two years? Petty only started two years.
Yes, Mariota ran the system better. But again, the system itself is run better on its own already. Johnny was in the first and second year of a new regime running a vastly different offense than the one Mike Sherman did. Oregon promoted the OC when Chip Kelly left. There's more continuity there, the players know the system better, and AGAIN, no comparison in competition! Zilch.
Playing the same comp in an Oregon uniform, is there any doubt Johnny would have had pretty much the same numbers?
I'll see this again too, if great stats are all that matters, then let's just keep a pipeline to wherever Mike Leach is coaching and whenever he has a QB that keeps the interceptions down (which is pretty much all of them), we can go get him.
Are we now pretending that Winston's two years and Tannehill's were equivalent? Tannehill's "two" were actually closer to 1-1/2 since Johnson had more attempts in the 2010 season. Also while I'm a Petty optimist, he doesn't belong anywhere near this discussion, as he is not in consideration for Round 1.
Oregon's scheme was more established than Sumlin's offense at A&M despite Chip's departure for MM's final two-years... that's certainly true. But is it relevant? Word we had here via Ag69 was that Sumlin gave up trying to install his UH offense as it "constrained" JM. Another interpretation... JM couldn't run it. If he could not run Sumlin's, why would we think he could run Chip's? Might JM have put up the same numbers in MM's place? Yes. But could he have done it within the confines of the Oregon offense? Doubtful...
Not sure where the stat comment came from since the only stat reference I made was wondering how many ex-HS QBs are playing other positions in the NFL. My point was that your comment about Tannehill's grade school time at the position was meaningless.
I'll address the rest later.
Although TC gave you a pass... I still think you should.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Quarterbacks don't start more than two years all that often in college, so I'm not sure what your point is. Is Tampa Bay taking "a huge gamble" by taking Winston who only started two years? Petty only started two years.
Yes, Mariota ran the system better. But again, the system itself is run better on its own already. Johnny was in the first and second year of a new regime running a vastly different offense than the one Mike Sherman did. Oregon promoted the OC when Chip Kelly left. There's more continuity there, the players know the system better, and AGAIN, no comparison in competition! Zilch.
Playing the same comp in an Oregon uniform, is there any doubt Johnny would have had pretty much the same numbers?
I'll see this again too, if great stats are all that matters, then let's just keep a pipeline to wherever Mike Leach is coaching and whenever he has a QB that keeps the interceptions down (which is pretty much all of them), we can go get him.
Are we now pretending that Winston's two years and Tannehill's were equivalent? Tannehill's "two" were actually closer to 1-1/2 since Johnson had more attempts in the 2010 season. Also while I'm a Petty optimist, he doesn't belong anywhere near this discussion, as he is not in consideration for Round 1.
Oregon's scheme was more established than Sumlin's offense at A&M despite Chip's departure for MM's final two-years... that's certainly true. But is it relevant? Word we had here via Ag69 was that Sumlin gave up trying to install his UH offense as it "constrained" JM. Another interpretation... JM couldn't run it. If he could not run Sumlin's, why would we think he could run Chip's? Might JM have put up the same numbers in MM's place? Yes. But could he have done it within the confines of the Oregon offense? Doubtful...
Not sure where the stat comment came from since the only stat reference I made was wondering how many ex-HS QBs are playing other positions in the NFL. My point was that your comment about Tannehill's grade school time at the position was meaningless.
I'll address the rest later.
Although TC gave you a pass... I still think you should.
Oregon's scheme was more established than Sumlin's offense at A&M despite Chip's departure for MM's final two-years... that's certainly true. But is it relevant? ...... interpretation... ...JM couldn't run it. If he could not run Sumlin's, why would we think he could run Chip's?
Right....exactly.....
After watching JFF freak out and not(even try to...) learn the offense here, Id say there is an excellent chance he could NOT or would not have learned or operated CK's offense nearly as well as Mariota did.....
His college success was mostly improvisation....and that would not have worked out well with Kelly the control freak.....I suspect it would have ended badly for JFF, actually.....
Oh, and Id say no heisman for Johnny either(cause he wouldnt have played as a freshman there)(if at all).....
-
Don't bother addressing the rest. We both have our opinions and I'm not really into reading about how you went to an A&M game once and that you know that it's much better than a game in Eugene.
As for Ohio State: http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team
Eugene is Mariota's home so even if I stipulate that it's the most intimidating stadium in the country, Mariota hasn't experienced its intimidating form.
5 of the top 10 from the SEC. The chart pretty much makes my point (even though I don't believe in those SOS charts). But as for OSU, they got credit for playing more games and in the context of our discussion (me saying SOS schedules don't matter and pointing to OSU-Oregon as an example), I'd have to see the rankings from the week before they played the game.
But again, going 10-2 in less competitive leagues is not equivalent to going 10-2 in a more competitive league. As far as I know, those charts don't factor that. Which is why it comes down to fan support, money, NFL players produced, inter conference game records, eye test, etc.
Eugene is Mariota's home so even if I stipulate that it's the most intimidating stadium in the country, Mariota hasn't experienced its intimidating form.
5 of the top 10 from the SEC. The chart pretty much makes my point (even though I don't believe in those SOS charts). But as for OSU, they got credit for playing more games and in the context of our discussion (me saying SOS schedules don't matter and pointing to OSU-Oregon as an example), I'd have to see the rankings from the week before they played the game.
But again, going 10-2 in less competitive leagues is not equivalent to going 10-2 in a more competitive league. As far as I know, those charts don't factor that. Which is why it comes down to fan support, money, NFL players produced, inter conference game records, eye test, etc.
However, he did play in front of 80,000+ crowds on more than one occasion...and won. So the argument that he doesn't know "intimidating" crowds is erroneous.
Like I said before, I also agree that the SEC is the best conference and that they play, on a whole, a tougher schedule. However, the talent gap isn't as wide as you seem to be painting it to be. The ceiling isn't higher in the SEC, the floor is. The top teams from each conference are just as good as the top teams from the SEC.
2014 was a bad year for the SEC and bowl games, sure. But how about in 2013, when no SEC team won a BCS bowl?
You're right, the charts don't factor the competition level between conferences. That's why there is now a playoff system. The best teams play against the best teams, and the winners go to the National Championship. That's how they addressed this argument that every SEC fan has made over the past 6 years. Don't you think it's kind of poetic justice that the only SEC team to make it to the playoff ended up losing?
The week before they played, Ohio State was ranked 7th and Oregon 16th.
-
Eugene is Mariota's home so even if I stipulate that it's the most intimidating stadium in the country, Mariota hasn't experienced its intimidating form.
5 of the top 10 from the SEC. The chart pretty much makes my point (even though I don't believe in those SOS charts). But as for OSU, they got credit for playing more games and in the context of our discussion (me saying SOS schedules don't matter and pointing to OSU-Oregon as an example), I'd have to see the rankings from the week before they played the game.
But again, going 10-2 in less competitive leagues is not equivalent to going 10-2 in a more competitive league. As far as I know, those charts don't factor that. Which is why it comes down to fan support, money, NFL players produced, inter conference game records, eye test, etc.
However, he did play in front of 80,000+ crowds on more than one occasion...and won. So the argument that he doesn't know "intimidating" crowds is erroneous.
Like I said before, I also agree that the SEC is the best conference and that they play, on a whole, a tougher schedule. However, the talent gap isn't as wide as you seem to be painting it to be. The ceiling isn't higher in the SEC, the floor is. The top teams from each conference are just as good as the top teams from the SEC.
2014 was a bad year for the SEC and bowl games, sure. But how about in 2013, when no SEC team won a BCS bowl?
You're right, the charts don't factor the competition level between conferences. That's why there is now a playoff system. The best teams play against the best teams, and the winners go to the National Championship. That's how they addressed this argument that every SEC fan has made over the past 6 years. Don't you think it's kind of poetic justice that the only SEC team to make it to the playoff ended up losing?
The week before they played, Ohio State was ranked 7th and Oregon 16th.
However, he did play in front of 80,000+ crowds on more than one occasion...and won. So the argument that he doesn't know "intimidating" crowds is erroneous.
Like I said before, I also agree that the SEC is the best conference and that they play, on a whole, a tougher schedule. However, the talent gap isn't as wide as you seem to be painting it to be. The ceiling isn't higher in the SEC, the floor is. The top teams from each conference are just as good as the top teams from the SEC.
2014 was a bad year for the SEC and bowl games, sure. But how about in 2013, when no SEC team won a BCS bowl?
You're right, the charts don't factor the competition level between conferences. That's why there is now a playoff system. The best teams play against the best teams, and the winners go to the National Championship. That's how they addressed this argument that every SEC fan has made over the past 6 years. Don't you think it's kind of poetic justice that the only SEC team to make it to the playoff ended up losing?
The week before they played, Ohio State was ranked 7th and Oregon 16th.
Two of those 80K crowds were neutral site games. No comparison to a Death Valley or even a Williams-Brice Stadium as you know. He beat UCLA twice when they put a pube hair over 80,000 people in the Rose Bowl. Ok great. I'd be surprised if Johnny didn't average 80K.
"The top teams from each conference are just as good as the top teams from the SEC." I don't argue this, except for the fact that we have far more NFL talent per team and most conferences have 1 or 2 "top teams" every year and we usually have at least 3-4. As I said earlier, we finished 5th in the conference in 2012 but ended the season ranked #5 overall.
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