These 12 QBs: Drivers or Passengers?

[golfer704u]

Originally Posted by King of Kings

I'm sure someone(not saying you Hiway) will spin this into something other than what I said and I now probably just sliced McCoy's head off and want him to fail down to the AFL with glee because I even brought up there being window's. Thanks for being cool with your post though Hiway.

Oh give it a rest and grow a pair already.

It's comments like this from you that do you no good.

More than one person has agreed with you that 1st round picks are naturally going to get a longer leash than a 3rd round pick. Some folks here have more of a want for Colt to get a longer leash because he's our QB right now. A bit unrealisitic? Sure

[King of Kings]

Originally Posted by golfer704u

And yeah I'm the one who still will question your statements

Yeah I could really give a fuck what you question honestly.

Originally Posted by golfer704u

Because yes I believe if you are watching on TV you can't be seeing enough of the field consistantly to make those judgements. And I've watched every game too and I don't hear commenters saying "WOW his WR was wide open and he just didn't see him" all that often.

So if we both are making our judgements based on what we see and hear on TV, then how do you explain those two? Watching on TV gives you a very limited basis for diagnosing problems.

Yes because i'm clearly the only one seeing it. It's not like there are a shitload of people watching on TV or AT THE FUCKING GAMES going onto Dawg Bones, The Browns Board, Browns Chat, Dawg Talkers, the CPD ect and saying they're seeing THE EXACT SAME THING I am seeing. See THIS is where the bullshit excuses turn comical. Now it's you're not seeing what you all thought you see, it was the TV playing tricks apparently. Even though people at the games could see the same shit.

Originally Posted by golfer704u

And again, do you discount that there are other facets of the offense that need improved on not the least of which is playcalling that just might affect Colt's own play? Because if you do, you certainly don't seem to state them in your enthusiasm to tell folks where Colt needs to improve.

And yet people wonder WHY i'm getting such an attitude lately. Now i'm enthusiastically dogging Golden Boy? Get outa here with that weak bullshit. I've said multiple times that the O.L. isn't great, that we need an RT and LG or Steiny to return, i've said the WR's aren't world burners. But I keep forgetting it doesn't matter if I say any of that as long as I dare utter the name Colt McCoy.

Here, one more time for you and everyone else to ignore: THIS. WHOLE. TEAM. NEEDS. REPAIRS. OFFENSE. AND. DEFENSE. Clear enough? Quick, pretend I haven't said that 500 times. Now ignore the following again: The problem IS whenever the O.L. DOES hold up, the playcalling IS good and the WR's DO get open the Golden Boy isn't taking his shot. See you'll ignore the first part again and just key in on "hey he said McCoy did something wrong!" *Yawn* have at it.

Originally Posted by golfer704u

And don't go playing the victim now that you claim you dropped it and someone else brought it up again, that's just lame.

What victim card, exactly? I'm telling you straight up. If you and the rest of the McCoy Backers fan club don't want me talking about him then stop bringing up how nothing is his fault and he's entitled to years at QB. The fact is I DID drop it and anyone who goes back through my posts for the week can see I dropped it in that last thread from a week or more ago.

I'm not playing a goddamn thing by stating that "someone brought the topic up, I am discussing it." That's not a victim that's a FACT.

Originally Posted by golfer704u

Facts where you were repeatedly not only very hard on Colt, but you also imediately belittled and made fun of anyone who wanted to bring up some kind of explanation (you can call them excuses all you want, others believe they are true explanations, one of those people is Shumur) as to WHY Colt is not playing up to the level he needed to. You did it for more than a little bit of time.

I did it when it reached the point of complete ridiculousness and it was everything on Earth's fault BUT his while people didn't even WANT to discuss it. Yeah dude, when people start throwing out shit like the ball was wet, the wind was windy and Mangini didn't love him hard enough last year i'm going to point and laugh. Grow a pair and deal with it.

Originally Posted by golfer704u

What I saw consistantly is people trying to diagnose what ALL the problems with this offense were INCLUDING the QB instead of making all about that QB, and then getting belitteld for it.

Nice spin and a pile of bullshit, go figure. You're right, SOME of us were diagnosing all of the issues including the QB.... While the McCoy Backers were pulling out every possible excuse to paint this picture of he actually did great, every single mistake is everyone and everything elses fault BUT his.

See you wanna run in here with this bullshit but it doesn't fly. Noone from your little clique of McCoy fanboys will even entertain the thought of him doing anything wrong period at all what so ever. No discussions of it are allowed, either. No no you can discuss it as long as you blame somebody else for it and toss on that he's a 2nd year "rookie" somehow.

Originally Posted by golfer704u

You can now go on another tirade about how I made it about you. Except I didn't I made it about your opinions.

You ARE making it about me. You won't even address it aside from "see? You brought up McCoy having problems clearly you're out to get him and think the entire team is perfect." Whatever, have it it because frankly I don't give a fuck about your opinion on me or my opinions. You want to jump in with Camp McCoy and try and come at me personally but frankly you can kiss my ass.

[King of Kings]

Originally Posted by golfer704u

Oh give it a rest and grow a pair already.

Follow your own advice. Grow a pair and sack up, some of us love the Browns and not individual players.

[hiwaygal]

Originally Posted by King of Kings

That's not us. We're starting one and 3rd round starters at key positions rarely get massive windows like #1 overall draft picks.

yeah, but I don't think we expected him to start so soon, so that kinda threw a rench in the overall development plan...he only got to start cuz jdh and sw both went down w/injuries last year. colt did good enough then (which wasn't hard cuz we're talkin about jdh and sw) to earn the starts. IMO now he needs to finish his development in the big spotlight and yeah, it's probably not gonna be with the same forgivings of a #1...but it *should* be longer, even if I know it probably won't

[Brown Warrior]

You make a good point. And for that, sir... fuck you!!!

It is insanely rare for QBs third round and lower to become long-term starters for their original team. Less rare but still not common for a second team.

Most starting quarterbacks are first rounders by their original team. A ton of other scenarios make up the other 12, which I expect to reduce year after year (Miami and Seattle next, etc.).

EDIT: Had to run out... so, to reiterate, you make a good point about teams who might hold onto said late rounder like Brunell or Hasselbeck or Schaub and have a very good QB.

Originally Posted by Alo

You read too much into my post because you're conflating two questions: one about opportunity, the other about accomplishment.

You wanted to know whether mid-round QBs get a shot with the team that drafted them: I showed that they do. But if you're asking about whether mid-rounders become legit NFL starting QBs, there is no logical reason to divide it based on where they played.

If anything, many of these guys stood a better shot of succeeding if they hadn't been dealt. If in a fit of jealous rage, Mike Holmgren had killed Brett Favre, would Mark Brunell have sucked in Green Bay? Or was landing with an expansion team a better spot? The same with your boy Matt Schaub, who went from a consistently competitive team to a bad squad with a shitty o-line.

Ultimately, the original team distinction doesn't matter, and I'm pretty sure you agree -- if the Browns end up looking for a new QB, I'm sure you won't say, "Look at all these mid-round QBs who succeeded with their second team. F*ck Barkley, let's go with Matt Flynn!"

[Alo]

We agree that the hit rate drops after the first round. I just think most of that ceases to matter once you've got a young guy who's shown some promise.

Just read an article on a Rams site that compared favorably Colt's play to Braford's. None of the second year guys are lighting it up, and some of the young first rounders who've been touted as "hits" are struggling: Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, and Mark Sanchez all have QBRs hovering around 80. People are beginning to question whether Sanchez will ever be able to carry that team, and rightfully so (I say that as someone who liked him as a prospect).

[Brown Warrior]

I'm beginning to doubt Sanchez, too... and I was a big fan. He can throw a ball that looks just gorgeous, thread the needle, run out of trouble and make an amazing play... but then really go flat for three quarters and look rattled. He's frustrating, but I kinda can't stand the Jets anymore. My non-Browns teams are SF and GB, both out of our conference.

It is an interesting phenomenon. Like, name all the starting QBs drafted in round 3. I think it's McCoy and Schaub, right? Round 2 would be Brees, Dalton, and Kolb (all very high round 2)? Round 6 is Brady and Hasselbeck. Romo is UDFA. Pretty much all the others are round one.

I don't count Miami at all. They're just rummaging. Too bad, because I thought Henne was really looking strong. Now they might be in the Luck sweepstakes.

[OzDawg]

can anyone imagine the controversy that'd occur if the seamstress accidenatly puts "Suck" on the back of Lucks jersey?

[golfer704u]

Originally Posted by King of Kings

I did it when it reached the point of complete ridiculousness and it was everything on Earth's fault BUT his while people didn't even WANT to discuss it. Yeah dude, when people start throwing out shit like the ball was wet, the wind was windy and Mangini didn't love him hard enough last year i'm going to point and laugh. Grow a pair and deal with it.

This is the only thing I'll respond to and only to day if that's they way you remember it, more power to your ability of self dilusion.

[golfer704u]

Originally Posted by King of Kings

Follow your own advice. Grow a pair and sack up, some of us love the Browns and not individual players.

Your so cute, I believe we should draft Luck even if McCoy get's marginally better. I do however believe you imensly over state McCoy's deficiencies.

See that's just it, People can't have thier own opinions that differ from yours without you resulting to the long post above.

You call them weak excuses all you want. The fact is your diatribes to that effect are pretty comical most of the time. But they do elicit the very responses you are now whining about. I never thought I'd see you play the vicitm. It's SAD really.

[OzDawg]

Luck is "projection" which means nothing has been proven at the next level ...yet...but he's destined to become the next peyton manning?


ps (edit) we are not gonna trade up for luck

[Masters]

To answer the question on QBs not taken in the first round starting today:
Romo (UDFA)
Dalton (2nd round)
Brees (2nd round)
Fitzpatrick (7th round)
Hasselbeck (6th round)
Schuab (3rd round)
McCoy (3rd round)
Cassel (7th round)
Jackson (2nd round)
Orton (4th round, though looks like Tebow is taking over)
Kolb (2nd round)
Brady (6th round)

Or a little more than 1/3 of NFL teams are starting a QB who they aquired outside of the first round. That's been the typical case for many years.

Frankly I can't believe this discussion is even being recycled. Best odds of getting a franchise QB are in the first round. But teams can find their franchise QB any where, just with lower odds.