Who wins the Super Bowl, QB-wise? | Page 10 | Barking Hard

Who wins the Super Bowl, QB-wise?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shep said:
That's the HUGE question, Golf... and I don't know the answer. Aside from blind faith in Holmgren (which is hard for me and basically shuts down any conversation), I'm a little vexed on how the Browns intend to decide whether to draft a quarterback in next year's first round.
Click to expand...

What's so scientific about it? If we go 1-15 we'll draft the pick of the litter at QB; and Holmgren will be coaching his ass. Who's kiddin who?

If we improve - the need to trade away the entire 2011 draft and some of our current studs for the first pick overall lessens.

It's tough for me to give a rat about the 2011 draft when we haven't even started the 2010 training camp yet. I'm not gonna hope we go 1-15 because that's as big of a conflict of interest as it gets.
- Tom F.
 
Shep said:
Sorry.

I give Holmgren and Co. more credit than to believe that they've decided completely against the grain to NOT find their long-term starter where long-term startes come from.

That's like saying we're all dying of thirst but we won't look for water in that well in the backyard. We'll start drilling.

And, again, Holmgren has a sample size of only two starters, really. One was acquired with a first round pick (Favre) and the other was a really specific situation with a quarterback he drafted as a backup with one team... and then traded for when he moved on to another.

Those are the only two starters he acquired from a position of some power. I wouldn't try to glean anything from that, except that he WOULD use a first round pick on a quarterback... and has.
Click to expand...

Well, He's also trained Andy Reid for success, Jon Gruden for success and Steve Mariucci for some some success. He's been to Superbowl Sundays with 2 different franchises which is pretty tough to do.

I think this has to do more with he didn't see your point at all about Jimmy Clausen. You look at Holmgren's resume for developing QBs after round 1 and it's pretty freakin impressive. He was one of the offensive coaches helpign Joe Montana go 4-0 on SB Sundays before his Holmgren's legend got watered and fertilized in Green Bay.

Nowhere on that resume does it equate to "doesn't get developing young QBs for stardom." When a football mind like Bill Walsh WANTS you running his offense - you're pretty freakin good. You gotta ace the interview first and then perpetuate excellence daily. Nothing more to it.
- Tom F.
 
  • 👍
Reactions: Alo
I think he was wrong about Clausen. We'll see.

I don't think going 8-8 behind 36-year-old Delhomme changes anything as far as whether we need a quarterback. At all.
 
Shep said:
I think he was wrong about Clausen. We'll see.

I don't think going 8-8 behind 36-year-old Delhomme changes anything as far as whether we need a quarterback. At all.
Click to expand...

Well fortunately Holmgren gets paid for his opinion because of what he's accomplished with soooo many QBs over the years. You don't take 2 different franchises to Superbowl Sundays without knowing what you're doing. And of course that was after being the OC in SF when Joe Montana was winning multiple SBs.

I LOVE what Holmgren did on draft day. He drafted a QB he felt REALLY good about; and told us Jimmy Clausen wasn't worth a 1st or a 2nd round pick here.

You've always told me Shep that BAD Qbs get their Head Coaches fired. Well, Charlie Weis got fired. When Quinn was his QB - ND went to 3 straight BCS Bowls inspite of some pretty bad defenses. Clausen took over and became the 1st starting QB in Notre Dame history to lose to 3 different military academies in 1 season. He also threw 17 INTs in 2008. Clausen finished his career with a losing record. Just like all 32 well paid NFL GMs, I don't see how this translates to football messiah at the more complex level. If he played high school ball in Texas, would you even give a crap when he got drafted? He's a local kid you read about all through his high school career so it's a hometown hero thing for you. Unfortunately the misplaced frustration of it all means poor Freckles has already been cut by you in May.
- Tom F.
 
Last edited:
Oy. I'm not frustrated. I just have an opinion. I went into the draft thinking there were two NFL starting quarterbacks -- Bradford and Clausen -- and I still feel that way.

Someone else could rise up, and maybe it'll end up being McCoy. Right now, I don't see a guy you can win with for 10-15 years. I just don't.

Do I think it'd be really cool if he BECAME that guy over the next couple years? Sure. That'd be great.

I'm not gonna stop talking about football because we hired Mike Holmgren. He left Green Bay because he wanted to be a GM, too... and he wasn't all that crazy good at it in Seattle. He's drafted plenty of clunker QBs, by the way, from Gilbrin Whatsisname to David Greene (in round 3, no less).

The thing about Holmgren that nobody denies is that he can develop a quarterback. I buy into that. I don't think he can develop ANY quarterback, however. My question is about which category Colt McCoy will fit under... the one with Hasselbeck or the one with Greene.
 
Shep said:
Oy. I'm not frustrated. I just have an opinion. I went into the draft thinking there were two NFL starting quarterbacks -- Bradford and Clausen -- and I still feel that way.

Someone else could rise up, and maybe it'll end up being McCoy. Right now, I don't see a guy you can win with for 10-15 years. I just don't.

Do I think it'd be really cool if he BECAME that guy over the next couple years? Sure. That'd be great.

I'm not gonna stop talking about football because we hired Mike Holmgren. He left Green Bay because he wanted to be a GM, too... and he wasn't all that crazy good at it in Seattle.He's drafted plenty of clunker QBs, by the way, from Gilbrin Whatsisname to David Greene (in round 3, no less).
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight because philosophically speaking it sounds outrageous. You're saying there's ZERO evidence of a winner in Colt McCoy. Before he went 10-3, 10-2, 12-1 and 13-1 as a starter at Texas - he lit it up in high school. Here's a cut and paste from a source online: "Coached by his father, Brad, at Jim Ned H.S. ... three-year letterman at quarterback who posted a 34-2 record as a starter." Adding high school and college together he's 79-9 as a starter.

Meanwhile, the Jimmy Clausen that took over after Quinn led ND to 3 straight BCS appearances went 16-19 in the exact same program/offense. That's not exactly taking a program to another level. Well, actually it is - in the WRONG direction. You're saying it'll be tons easier at the next level? For someone that wants everyone to think he's a QB guru - you're really not selling anyone but your closest friend on the board about Clausen Shep.

FWIW, Holmgren has had the following QBs in his training camp at Green Bay:
Don Majikowski, Brett Favre, Mark Brunell, Matt Hasselbeck, Kurt Warner...
Holmgren has been to 2 Superbowls with Green Bay and 1 Superbowl with Seattle after multiple Superbowls as an OC in SF. Where are you seeing such incompetance with QBs or winning?
- Tom F.
 
Alo's point i think is that we are beating to shit a point which just isn't ready to be defined yet.

ahhh, i don't know.
 
I don't think MZ is questioning whether or not Alo had a good point, just his choice of band to make his point.....
 
  • 👍
Reactions: mz.
In hindsight, this would have been a better pick.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgSPaXgAdzE]YouTube - Beck - Loser[/ame]
 
Alo, though Beck is rather mainstream, I shall return your street cred to you.

I would have chosen this gem from the Jason Biggs movie 'Loser.'

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jJWQkVgDs4]YouTube - Wheatus - Teenage Dirtbag[/ame]
 
He might not have sprinkled fairy dust on low round QB's - and nobody here said he did (talk about debating topics nobody brought up, pot/kettle) - he also hasn't drafted QB's in the first round even when he needed them.

Mike can choose a QB in round 1. I have no problem with that. He had two opportunities to draft QB's in the first round and didn't.

What did Mike do? He stole QB's off someone else's roster. Doesn't mean he will again. Just means he thinks he can find an answer outside of that round.

I hope we do find a long term QB and I don't care if it is round 1.

Looking for a long term answer in round 1 is a 50/50 proposition. You cannot argue that. Numbers don't lie. If you draft him there he better be the guy. You don't take him just because you need him, but because he is balls out no doubt the guy.

Clear?
 
golfer704u said:
Actually it's more like 30/70 but those are just facts.
Click to expand...

OK, but as we've seen, there are positions that bust in the 1st just as often as QB.

And I'd wager that the odds of a 3rd round QB winning (or even playing in) a SB is like 200:1.
 
Only if they're up top, Veg. But so does any bust up there. Courtney busting hurt as bad as Couch IMO.

Quinn didn't hurt us at all (financially).
 
The drop off in hope from round one to everything after is steeper at quarterback than at any other position. So the biggest risk is NOT taking your hoped-for savior in round one. The odds are stacked against you if you go the alternative route.

Why? Because you almost certainly won't find your guy at the most important position. And if you don't, you can't win in this league. And if you don't win... you're gone. That's risky.

The quarterback that defined Holmgren's career was acquired by the Packers with a first round pick. Given that 33rd pick Brett Favre didn't do anything in Atlanta his rookie year except drink beer, they basically drafted Favre a year after he was eligible.

So to the question of whether Holmgren would use a first round pick on a quarterback, given that it's the way to acquire a quarterback? Uh, yeah.

Crystal clear?

Vegasdogg said:
He might not have sprinkled fairy dust on low round QB's - and nobody here said he did (talk about debating topics nobody brought up, pot/kettle) - he also hasn't drafted QB's in the first round even when he needed them.

Mike can choose a QB in round 1. I have no problem with that. He had two opportunities to draft QB's in the first round and didn't.

What did Mike do? He stole QB's off someone else's roster. Doesn't mean he will again. Just means he thinks he can find an answer outside of that round.

I hope we do find a long term QB and I don't care if it is round 1.

Looking for a long term answer in round 1 is a 50/50 proposition. You cannot argue that. Numbers don't lie. If you draft him there he better be the guy. You don't take him just because you need him, but because he is balls out no doubt the guy.

Clear?
Click to expand...
 
golfer704u said:
Actually it's more like 30/70 but those are just facts.
Click to expand...

Frankly, since the Russell-Quinn year, they're all looking pretty good. And in the past 5-7 years, we haven't seen many outright busts aside from that year.

Smith, Rodgers, Campbell, Roethlisberger, Manning, Rivers, Ryan, Flacco, Stafford, Sanchez...

Lots of good first round QBs flowing into the league these days. It's been a pretty damn good way to go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom