As far as I'm concerned, the 'leadership' and 'winning mentality' bit is usually a cover-up for a QB that isn't particularly good in the NFL but was *really good* in college. QBs that win in the NFL aren't usually praised for their winning mentality. They're praised for being effective passers.

That's what Colt is, however. Colt IS an effective QB. He's not a WINNER , he's good. Really good. Especially for a rookie.

If the starting job is taken from him, it would not be because Colt is in any way inferior to Jake or Seneca. He is not.

More potential, less NFL experience, better performance.

The last factor should be THE deciding factor. The first two are just extra reasons. I'd unequivocally say yes. Well, no, I'd probably say something like, "Are you xxxxing dense? I'm the Goddamn batman!" And then I'd say yes.

Yeah, Colt's definitely earning some baller points today.

@kosar_for_president said:

Your sig is funny, money to start a board. I started one for $7.95 and 20 minutes of time for fun. Wow it's so hard.

LINK

What? No, it's actually not a crack on Stan. I was copying Inspecta's sig and avatar (as everyone else was for a short time; you know, the body slam avatar?). It just so happens that our sigs are locked and you're not allowed to edit them, because I have tried to remove it.

But continue to jump to conclusions if it pleases you.

Did you ask if he carried the game 'Battletoads?'

Also, I imagine I won't have many more posts before I am banned from here, so I wish you farewell.

@kbndawg said:

Hey TN i'm from Johnson City.

The Browns just have so many holes that it is hard to pin point one thing. Yes, we could start with the QB but that is not going to solve anything. Quinn could start next week but with our lack of talent the opposition would be able to gameplan his "strengths". Gotta realize that the lack of all around talent makes it easy to defense the Browns.

See, this is what a reasonable post on the QB discussion looks like. He, like myself, realizes that there is no point to the debate. Therefore, we should stick with DA.

@lemosley01 said:

I think

1) Not being able to read defenses

2) Not being able to complete > 50% of your passes (or 40% actually)

3) Fumbling the ball. A lot.

4) Throwing into double/triple/11-man coverage

5) Missing wide open receivers

6) Rocketing balls at receiver's feet

are a much bigger hit than mobility. I'm shocked - shocked I tell you - that the right side of the line looks dreadful and teams are still loading the box. DA was the answer to all of those problems.

But Quinn isn't liked in the locker room - or something. Apparently, if you are well-liked, the team will play hard for you.

Let's break this down, shall we?

1) Quinn didn't need to read defenses when he was checking down for those -1 yard gains.

2) Again, when you're trying to win, unlike Quinn, you might actually try to win the game instead of not losing. Guess what? Trying not to lose leads to losses.

3) Did you see Quinn's fumble in the Minnesota game?

4) Again, DA's a playmaker, something that Quinn only wishes he could be.

5) Quinn had this problem, too, you know. Just because there was a guy open in the backfield with a guy closing in on him doesn't mean there weren't open downfield. Quinn was why Braylon, our best receiver, was traded: you know this, right?

6) At least he can get it near his receivers, unlike Quinn.

Your guy was given plenty of opportunity. How about we let people who actually have potential play?

There is no QB controversy. DA got us our first win, and there is no chance that Mangini will put Dink'n'Dunk back in.

@chicopee-john said:

It's only halftime and he has already thrown for 73 yards and has completed over half of his passes? Only ONE int????

Man, is he lighting it up just in time for teams to drool over the prospects of trading for him in the off season.

Give the guy a break. The ratio of completions of Completions to INTs is under 10.

That is not just a sign of life, that is progress.

@lumbergh said:

I think it's funny that folks who exiled themselves to the BQ-Homo-Forum still post here. Way to make a stand, pussy.

You're either with Team Lumbergh or you're against us. Make up your mind, peons.

@deadwombat said:

Freakin' damnit. Stan calling out Inspecta was the last straw for me in this thread. BOTH sides need to drop this drama charade now. I enjoy both forums. There are people on both that like as posters and I would like to continue reading their imput. I ALSO would like it to stay that way without everyone getting pissed off and increasing the antagonism between the two forums. I'm here to talk football and read about football. I dont want to see a pissing contest about guys butthurt over being snubbed by someone else on the internet. All this thread is doing is opening up wounds which I were hoping were starting to heal. But now the whole situation is spawning name calling, trolling, counter-trolling, and people generally being pissed off and whining about eachother. Now look, I'm not asking for everyone to kiss and make up... but at the very least people need to respect eachothers wishes and get on with life.

We need to drop this subject unless people can be civil about it.

Drama, my dear friend, is created by overreaction. Embrace it. Join the dark side.

Oh, and...

@djhero said:

A revolution (from the Latin revolutio, "a turn around") is a fundamental change in power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution

Madden downgraded *EVERYONE.*

To emphasize superstars or some such.

Doesn't really matter. People are just going to create Customs will all 99s anyway. Except this time, they're going to be more powerful.

Eek.

EDIT: That was choppier than Tacitus. I haven't even read Tacitus enough to emulate his style. How is this happening?

@restinpeace said:

You really think "playing games" matters. BQ hasn't even shown to be a NFL QB unlike DA, who is just a subpar NFL QB.

Quinnbots enjoy the BQ dream, not the reality. Same thing for the Andersonites, who think he is a starting quality caliber of NFL QB.

BQ won't be in the league in a few years.

Look! A false equivalence!

Anderson's played in 34 NFL Games. Quinn's played in 7. There may be a reason why DA has shown something.

@hammertime said:

I'm pretty certain his fortay is e-mailing.

I very much enjoy this post, and wholeheartedly endorse it.

Stan is Ate. Ate, I think, is admin. Admin is a philosopher. All philosophers are fans of The Who. Therefore, Stan is a fan of The Who.

EDIT:

@dawgtracker said:

It is also possible that the financing on that house assumed a balloon payment which required him to be the starting quarterback. He simply might not be able to pay for that house right now

This seems likely, assuming Mangini's not a lying... assuming Mangini's not a liar.

@farang said:

Actually that old broad from Maine makes me want to puke, she doesn't have a pair, she gave in to the pressure.

Good one. Opposing the side threatening violence is 'giving in to pressure.'

What a weakling.

Yeah, the signs are pretty clear. Quinn didn't really ever look good, but still... what the hell? He knew what Anderson had, so making a final judgment on Quinn after being his coach for 2.5 games is... breathtakingly arrogant, at best. This man had better be convinced that Ratliff is the second coming if this trade goes down, ESPECIALLY if it's a 3rd and a 5th.

And setting Quinn up to fail... perhaps I'm simply an optimist, but that, too, is mind-boggling. If you were setting him up to fail, why even bother going through the motion just to reduce his trade value? And yet, the playcalling indicates that he didn't want him to succeed... or that Daboll's just a tool.

I can't follow Mangini's reasoning. If Quinn's failure was simply on himself, how could he conclude that definitively after coaching him for 2.5 games, and why did Daboll's playcalling change so much in the Baltimore game?

If Daboll was at fault, why is he still in town? After all, it took Mangini less time to determine that Quinn was a bust.

If he did set him up for failure, why bother playing him? Lums could have told you that if you set someone up to fail, his draft stock will go down. We could have gotten a first for him in the offseason. Why intentionally sabotage his trade value?

I'm not the most intelligent man to grace the Earth: note this carefully. Nevertheless, if someone-anyone-could determine any clear motives for this, I would love to hear them, as they elude me. Either we have a shrewd politician who values his job above all else or we have someone with a limited capacity for rational thought.

The mind, it boggles.

Steeler SChuck said:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4554752

Half-ton statue gone day after unveiling

Comment Email Print Share

Associated Press

ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. -- A chainsaw carving of former Buffalo Bills running back Thurman Thomas is missing from a parking lot across from Ralph Wilson Stadium, a day after the statue was unveiled.

The project's creator, Therese Forton-Barnes, says the 8½-foot statue carved from a fallen pine tree weighs more than 1,000 pounds and it took a crane to get it set up for Sunday's event. She says it would have taken several strong people with a flatbed truck to remove it. It's unclear when it disappeared.

Orchard Park police are investigating.

The statue was unveiled before Sunday's Bills game against the Browns. It's the 34th in a fundraising series that grew out of a 2006 snowstorm that toppled thousands of trees. The carvings feature celebrities, animals and historical figures.

You *do* remember what happened after the Pats-Bills game, right? 🥷