Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2014 QB's vs 2015 Qb's
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 103
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


It's so pointless to compare stats. Especially in college. Difference conference, competition, etc.

Winston had a good season. Let's see if he peaked or if he's builds on it.

Plenty of QBs have had great seasons only to fizzle when things change. Wilson, Barkely, Landry Jones, Locker, etc recently. Hero's to zero's over the course of 1 season.

If I've learned anything, it's not to buy college hype after 1 season. Let's see what Winston does say w/out Kelvin Benjamin to throw to next year for example.


who was Kelvin Benjamin before Jameis Winston came to Tally? Answer that for me. I never heard his name even being spoken, now he turned Jameis Winston from a scrub to a Heisman Laughing



I like how nobody mentions how successful Stanford has been without Luck though....beating Oregon the past two years, a team they couldn't beat and that Luck had a lot of trouble with...with Kevin Hogan playing QB Laughing


I didn't say Benjamin made Winston. I just suggested things will look different next year in "Tally" without him.

Winston still plays in the pathetic ACC and IMO wasn't' the best QB in the country last year. Putting up stats in the ACC isn't impressive to me.

Who'd he play last year? Auburn was the toughest opponent and he looked pedestrian against a poor Auburn defense. Yeah, yeah…. the come back drive. Again…. Auburn's defense was a sieve, so not really impressed.

Would have loved to see him play Alabama or Missouri. Hardest opponent was probably Clemson, who boasts a pathetic defense as well. He took advantage of a week ACC schedule, period.

Stanford has been successful because of their defense. And Hogan is a stud in his own right. In fact (and please spare me the "stats") I'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL, he will be a better pro.



who was the best QB in college last year? I'm dying to know your answer. And if your criteria for being a great prospect is that you can never struggle, you're even dumber than I thought.



Dude said he'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL Laughing. As I said, people that say these things clearly have a biased agenda
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 103
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

and a redshirt freshman at Oklahoma who lost his job earlier in the year embarrassed the Tide, please stop acting like they're so great
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11603
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OakleyCap wrote:
It was Reality_Check a very respected member on this forum.


That's fine. I'm not taking anything away from this dude but he obviously has difficulty understanding a simple concept. Winston is not ready for the pros yet. It's very simple to see that and not only that, conventional thinking agrees w/ me. He put up big stats and won a Heisman against poor defenses. Big deal. People in college do that all the time.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11603
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


If Luck would've thrown anything like that, of course he wouldn't have. I don't see the point of even bringing that up. You took an extreme case that barely even applies to this conversation.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 103
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


If Luck would've thrown anything like that, of course he wouldn't have. I don't see the point of even bringing that up. You took an extreme case that barely even applies to this conversation.



Because stats obviously do matter...they are a big part of evaluating a player. And I see you still haven't given me reasons why Luck is so called the better prospect, and you can't!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OakleyCap


Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 3358
Location: CA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
OakleyCap wrote:
It was Reality_Check a very respected member on this forum.


That's fine. I'm not taking anything away from this dude but he obviously has difficulty understanding a simple concept. Winston is not ready for the pros yet. It's very simple to see that and not only that, conventional thinking agrees w/ me. He put up big stats and won a Heisman against poor defenses. Big deal. People in college do that all the time.


So based on this logic why are Teddy Bridgewater, Blake Bortles, and David Carr considered first round picks? All three of them played against below average defenses on a weekly basis, far worse than the teams that Winston was going up against.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22112
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


It's so pointless to compare stats. Especially in college. Difference conference, competition, etc.

Winston had a good season. Let's see if he peaked or if he's builds on it.

Plenty of QBs have had great seasons only to fizzle when things change. Wilson, Barkely, Landry Jones, Locker, etc recently. Hero's to zero's over the course of 1 season.

If I've learned anything, it's not to buy college hype after 1 season. Let's see what Winston does say w/out Kelvin Benjamin to throw to next year for example.


who was Kelvin Benjamin before Jameis Winston came to Tally? Answer that for me. I never heard his name even being spoken, now he turned Jameis Winston from a scrub to a Heisman Laughing



I like how nobody mentions how successful Stanford has been without Luck though....beating Oregon the past two years, a team they couldn't beat and that Luck had a lot of trouble with...with Kevin Hogan playing QB Laughing


I didn't say Benjamin made Winston. I just suggested things will look different next year in "Tally" without him.

Winston still plays in the pathetic ACC and IMO wasn't' the best QB in the country last year. Putting up stats in the ACC isn't impressive to me.

Who'd he play last year? Auburn was the toughest opponent and he looked pedestrian against a poor Auburn defense. Yeah, yeah…. the come back drive. Again…. Auburn's defense was a sieve, so not really impressed.

Would have loved to see him play Alabama or Missouri. Hardest opponent was probably Clemson, who boasts a pathetic defense as well. He took advantage of a week ACC schedule, period.

Stanford has been successful because of their defense. And Hogan is a stud in his own right. In fact (and please spare me the "stats") I'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL, he will be a better pro.



who was the best QB in college last year? I'm dying to know your answer. And if your criteria for being a great prospect is that you can never struggle, you're even dumber than I thought.



Dude said he'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL Laughing. As I said, people that say these things clearly have a biased agenda


What's 'dumb' is crowning a college QB after one year starting in general. But factor in the sad level of competition faced and the talent around the QB in this case, you'd think patience should be exercised before going all in.

Best QB in college last year was Manziel (here comes the backlash). He was better in 2013 than in 2012 when he won the Heisman. He was more valuable to his team playing against SEC defenses on an A&M team with a poor defense.

I'm not a Bridgewater guy, but I'd argue Teddy had a better season considering the lack of talent around him.

As for Hogan, that chip will fall in time. He's got all the tools of an NFL QB. He plays in a run heavy, ball control offense so his stats don't "wow" the casual viewer. Also, put Hackenburg in that conversation, he will prove better than Winston come time to play NFL ball.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22112
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
and a redshirt freshman at Oklahoma who lost his job earlier in the year embarrassed the Tide, please stop acting like they're so great


Yeah… because no team expecting to play in the Nat'l Champ game downplayed a meaningless bowl game in the past.

YOu could viably see Alabama was not up for that game. Was not a shock they lost.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11603
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


If Luck would've thrown anything like that, of course he wouldn't have. I don't see the point of even bringing that up. You took an extreme case that barely even applies to this conversation.



Because stats obviously do matter...they are a big part of evaluating a player. And I see you still haven't given me reasons why Luck is so called the better prospect, and you can't!!


First of all, you never asked why Luck was a better prospect. How am I supposed to know that's what you're looking for w/o you telling me? I'm a simple guy from Ohio posting in a forum. I don't know what you expect me to be but if you want something, I suggest promoting it.

Stats matter to an extent but not how you're portraying them. You totally took it out of context. I hope you can understand that b/c it's so easy to see. Now, Luck was better for these reasons: arm strength, accuracy, smarts, poise, mechanics, and other variables. I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 103
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


It's so pointless to compare stats. Especially in college. Difference conference, competition, etc.

Winston had a good season. Let's see if he peaked or if he's builds on it.

Plenty of QBs have had great seasons only to fizzle when things change. Wilson, Barkely, Landry Jones, Locker, etc recently. Hero's to zero's over the course of 1 season.

If I've learned anything, it's not to buy college hype after 1 season. Let's see what Winston does say w/out Kelvin Benjamin to throw to next year for example.


who was Kelvin Benjamin before Jameis Winston came to Tally? Answer that for me. I never heard his name even being spoken, now he turned Jameis Winston from a scrub to a Heisman Laughing



I like how nobody mentions how successful Stanford has been without Luck though....beating Oregon the past two years, a team they couldn't beat and that Luck had a lot of trouble with...with Kevin Hogan playing QB Laughing


I didn't say Benjamin made Winston. I just suggested things will look different next year in "Tally" without him.

Winston still plays in the pathetic ACC and IMO wasn't' the best QB in the country last year. Putting up stats in the ACC isn't impressive to me.

Who'd he play last year? Auburn was the toughest opponent and he looked pedestrian against a poor Auburn defense. Yeah, yeah…. the come back drive. Again…. Auburn's defense was a sieve, so not really impressed.

Would have loved to see him play Alabama or Missouri. Hardest opponent was probably Clemson, who boasts a pathetic defense as well. He took advantage of a week ACC schedule, period.

Stanford has been successful because of their defense. And Hogan is a stud in his own right. In fact (and please spare me the "stats") I'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL, he will be a better pro.



who was the best QB in college last year? I'm dying to know your answer. And if your criteria for being a great prospect is that you can never struggle, you're even dumber than I thought.



Dude said he'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL Laughing. As I said, people that say these things clearly have a biased agenda


What's 'dumb' is crowning a college QB after one year starting in general. But factor in the sad level of competition faced and the talent around the QB in this case, you'd think patience should be exercised before going all in.

Best QB in college last year was Manziel (here comes the backlash). He was better in 2013 than in 2012 when he won the Heisman. He was more valuable to his team playing against SEC defenses on an A&M team with a poor defense.

I'm not a Bridgewater guy, but I'd argue Teddy had a better season considering the lack of talent around him.

As for Hogan, that chip will fall in time. He's got all the tools of an NFL QB. He plays in a run heavy, ball control offense so his stats don't "wow" the casual viewer. Also, put Hackenburg in that conversation, he will prove better than Winston come time to play NFL ball.



I knew you would say Manziel, the dude with one of the best offensive lines in college history with the likes of Mike Evans catching passes from him, but nope, you didn't hold that against him...


Not to mention, he lost against Auburn, when it was time to make a game winning drive, he folded. Jameis didn't! LSU made him look like an amateur. Dude completed like 39% of his passes . The only supposedly great SEC defense he beat was Alabama, and as I said before, they were exposed by a redshirt freshman. He didn't play Florida, and he didn't do anything against them the previous year. He didn't do anything spectacular against Missouri, and the guy is really interception prone. So what great SEC team did Manziel abuse? Ole Miss? They haven't been relevant for years? Mississippi State? You're a complete clown!


I didn't crown anyone, all I stated was that based on his play, there is no reason he shouldn't be considered a prospect on the same level as Luck. And you have no problem crowing players, you just crowned Hackenburg and Hogan as better than Jameis....You have a biased agenda and you inserting Teddy Bridgewater as one of your top QBs doesn't fool me at all. Laughing


I see right through you little boy!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11603
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OakleyCap wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
OakleyCap wrote:
It was Reality_Check a very respected member on this forum.


That's fine. I'm not taking anything away from this dude but he obviously has difficulty understanding a simple concept. Winston is not ready for the pros yet. It's very simple to see that and not only that, conventional thinking agrees w/ me. He put up big stats and won a Heisman against poor defenses. Big deal. People in college do that all the time.


So based on this logic why are Teddy Bridgewater, Blake Bortles, and David Carr considered first round picks? All three of them played against below average defenses on a weekly basis, far worse than the teams that Winston was going up against.


Teddy Bridgewater is for many reasons. He has great football intelligence, good arm strength, a good enough arm, he uses the pocket well among other things. Nothing to do w/ who he played. Bortles is a project that is taking advantage of a weak QB class. I don't know why he's a first round prospect.

When determining a prospects' draft position, you look for intelligence, experience, accuracy, arm strength among many other things. When people possess these traits, they are going to put up good numbers. Why? B/c that's what people who possess those traits do; SUCCEED. Now, what you are seemingly getting confused is that people who put up those numbers are good prospects which is entirely false. There are collegiate systems that tailor to a specific QB and take advantage of their best traits. You can get away w/ this in college but more times than not, not in the NFL. Kellen Moore, Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang, Chase Coffman, and countless others tore it up in college but sucked in the NFL if they ever even got a shot. Why? B/c their game (or those traits I listed above) did not translate into the NFL.

Make sense?? Do you see the difference?
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 103
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


If Luck would've thrown anything like that, of course he wouldn't have. I don't see the point of even bringing that up. You took an extreme case that barely even applies to this conversation.



Because stats obviously do matter...they are a big part of evaluating a player. And I see you still haven't given me reasons why Luck is so called the better prospect, and you can't!!


First of all, you never asked why Luck was a better prospect. How am I supposed to know that's what you're looking for w/o you telling me? I'm a simple guy from Ohio posting in a forum. I don't know what you expect me to be but if you want something, I suggest promoting it.

Stats matter to an extent but not how you're portraying them. You totally took it out of context. I hope you can understand that b/c it's so easy to see. Now, Luck was better for these reasons: arm strength, accuracy, smarts, poise, mechanics, and other variables. I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.



Laughing at Luck being the better prospect because of arm strength...that's one of his weaknesses. Accuracy? Did you even watch Jameis Winston play? You've got to be kidding. That kid is one of the most accurate QBs I have ever seen. Poise? A freshman winning the national championship and going undefeated while doing so is the definition of poise. Kid is lauded for his poise. He was one of the best in the country against the blitz and on 3rd down as a freshman. Smarts? How did you even measure that? That's just a code word. You don't know a damn thing about football, and you damn sure don't watch it. We'll end this discussion here because I don't argue with idiots.



Only thing that even had any substance in your post is mechanics, and as a redshirt freshman, Andrew Luck's mechanics were not flawless.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22112
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


It's so pointless to compare stats. Especially in college. Difference conference, competition, etc.

Winston had a good season. Let's see if he peaked or if he's builds on it.

Plenty of QBs have had great seasons only to fizzle when things change. Wilson, Barkely, Landry Jones, Locker, etc recently. Hero's to zero's over the course of 1 season.

If I've learned anything, it's not to buy college hype after 1 season. Let's see what Winston does say w/out Kelvin Benjamin to throw to next year for example.


who was Kelvin Benjamin before Jameis Winston came to Tally? Answer that for me. I never heard his name even being spoken, now he turned Jameis Winston from a scrub to a Heisman Laughing



I like how nobody mentions how successful Stanford has been without Luck though....beating Oregon the past two years, a team they couldn't beat and that Luck had a lot of trouble with...with Kevin Hogan playing QB Laughing


I didn't say Benjamin made Winston. I just suggested things will look different next year in "Tally" without him.

Winston still plays in the pathetic ACC and IMO wasn't' the best QB in the country last year. Putting up stats in the ACC isn't impressive to me.

Who'd he play last year? Auburn was the toughest opponent and he looked pedestrian against a poor Auburn defense. Yeah, yeah…. the come back drive. Again…. Auburn's defense was a sieve, so not really impressed.

Would have loved to see him play Alabama or Missouri. Hardest opponent was probably Clemson, who boasts a pathetic defense as well. He took advantage of a week ACC schedule, period.

Stanford has been successful because of their defense. And Hogan is a stud in his own right. In fact (and please spare me the "stats") I'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL, he will be a better pro.



who was the best QB in college last year? I'm dying to know your answer. And if your criteria for being a great prospect is that you can never struggle, you're even dumber than I thought.



Dude said he'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL Laughing. As I said, people that say these things clearly have a biased agenda


What's 'dumb' is crowning a college QB after one year starting in general. But factor in the sad level of competition faced and the talent around the QB in this case, you'd think patience should be exercised before going all in.

Best QB in college last year was Manziel (here comes the backlash). He was better in 2013 than in 2012 when he won the Heisman. He was more valuable to his team playing against SEC defenses on an A&M team with a poor defense.

I'm not a Bridgewater guy, but I'd argue Teddy had a better season considering the lack of talent around him.

As for Hogan, that chip will fall in time. He's got all the tools of an NFL QB. He plays in a run heavy, ball control offense so his stats don't "wow" the casual viewer. Also, put Hackenburg in that conversation, he will prove better than Winston come time to play NFL ball.



I knew you would say Manziel, the dude with one of the best offensive lines in college history with the likes of Mike Evans catching passes from him, but nope, you didn't hold that against him...


Not to mention, he lost against Auburn, when it was time to make a game winning drive, he folded. Jameis didn't! LSU made him look like an amateur. Dude completed like 39% of his passes . The only supposedly great SEC defense he beat was Alabama, and as I said before, they were exposed by a redshirt freshman. He didn't play Florida, and he didn't do anything against them the previous year. He didn't do anything spectacular against Missouri, and the guy is really interception prone. So what great SEC team did Manziel abuse? Ole Miss? They haven't been relevant for years? Mississippi State? You're a complete clown!


I didn't crown anyone, all I stated was that based on his play, there is no reason he shouldn't be considered a prospect on the same level as Luck. And you have no problem crowing players, you just crowned Hackenburg and Hogan as better than Jameis....You have a biased agenda and you inserting Teddy Bridgewater as one of your top QBs doesn't fool me at all. Laughing


I see right through you little boy!


Not sure what that means. Kind of creepy and I don't know why you are getting so confrontational about varying opinions.

But get back to me when Winston plays a defense like LSU's. Also should point out, Manziel injured his shoulder against Auburn up 31-24 at them time. Came back in the 4th and tried to gut out a win.

As for the Winston, Luck side of this. Get back to us when Winston PROVES it more than one season. Luck showed a consistent level of play for 3 seasons and put Stanford back on the map.

That's all were saying. Slow your roll. Let's see Winston repeat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11603
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


If Luck would've thrown anything like that, of course he wouldn't have. I don't see the point of even bringing that up. You took an extreme case that barely even applies to this conversation.



Because stats obviously do matter...they are a big part of evaluating a player. And I see you still haven't given me reasons why Luck is so called the better prospect, and you can't!!


First of all, you never asked why Luck was a better prospect. How am I supposed to know that's what you're looking for w/o you telling me? I'm a simple guy from Ohio posting in a forum. I don't know what you expect me to be but if you want something, I suggest promoting it.

Stats matter to an extent but not how you're portraying them. You totally took it out of context. I hope you can understand that b/c it's so easy to see. Now, Luck was better for these reasons: arm strength, accuracy, smarts, poise, mechanics, and other variables. I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.



Laughing at Luck being the better prospect because of arm strength...that's one of his weaknesses. Accuracy? Did you even watch Jameis Winston play? You've got to be kidding. That kid is one of the most accurate QBs I have ever seen. Poise? A freshman winning the national championship and going undefeated while doing so is the definition of poise. Kid is lauded for his poise. He was one of the best in the country against the blitz and on 3rd down as a freshman. Smarts? How did you even measure that? That's just a code word. You don't know a damn thing about football, and you damn sure don't watch it. We'll end this discussion here because I don't argue with idiots.



Only thing that even had any substance in your post is mechanics, and as a redshirt freshman, Andrew Luck's mechanics were not flawless.


JTagg7754 wrote:
I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.


Not like I didn't call that one. Feel free to call me an idiot more often though, you're showing great class. I believe bias was brought up before. Do you have any mirrors where you live?

The funny thing is, you say "how do you even measure smarts" then call me an idiot. The irony of that is simply amazing. Thank you for the laughs. You can go back to whatever forum you belong to now.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 103
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


If Luck would've thrown anything like that, of course he wouldn't have. I don't see the point of even bringing that up. You took an extreme case that barely even applies to this conversation.



Because stats obviously do matter...they are a big part of evaluating a player. And I see you still haven't given me reasons why Luck is so called the better prospect, and you can't!!


First of all, you never asked why Luck was a better prospect. How am I supposed to know that's what you're looking for w/o you telling me? I'm a simple guy from Ohio posting in a forum. I don't know what you expect me to be but if you want something, I suggest promoting it.

Stats matter to an extent but not how you're portraying them. You totally took it out of context. I hope you can understand that b/c it's so easy to see. Now, Luck was better for these reasons: arm strength, accuracy, smarts, poise, mechanics, and other variables. I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.



Laughing at Luck being the better prospect because of arm strength...that's one of his weaknesses. Accuracy? Did you even watch Jameis Winston play? You've got to be kidding. That kid is one of the most accurate QBs I have ever seen. Poise? A freshman winning the national championship and going undefeated while doing so is the definition of poise. Kid is lauded for his poise. He was one of the best in the country against the blitz and on 3rd down as a freshman. Smarts? How did you even measure that? That's just a code word. You don't know a damn thing about football, and you damn sure don't watch it. We'll end this discussion here because I don't argue with idiots.



Only thing that even had any substance in your post is mechanics, and as a redshirt freshman, Andrew Luck's mechanics were not flawless.


JTagg7754 wrote:
I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.


Not like I didn't call that one. Feel free to call me an idiot more often though, you're showing great class. I believe bias was brought up before. Do you have any mirrors where you live?

The funny thing is, you say "how do you even measure smarts" then call me an idiot. The irony of that is simply amazing. Thank you for the laughs. You can go back to whatever forum you belong to now.


please tell me how you measured that if you don't use on the field production...it's a code word, nothing more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group