Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brady Quinn

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Burns336 View Post
    I never said he didnt have skills, I just pointed out the trend that implies one of these guys should be a complete bust. The only stat Having to do with brady quin that really holds any weight with me is 0-4 against USC and 0-3 in Bowl games. 0-7 in what I think are 7 of the biggest games of his career. (USC is important every year for Notre Dame and of couse the Bowl Game is important) I just think he may have been a bit overhyped due to playing at an overhyped program. Im glad we didn't take him.
    Notre Dame overhyped; yes.

    However, without Brady Quinn, the Irish would have been a .500 team.

    Seriously, how good would Jamarcus have done in the Sugar Bowl if he was going up against his own defense. Russell probably struggled in practice trying to go up against that defense. Notre Dame is a popular team, and plays good competition. A lot of which is on another level than they are.

    Without Quinn, USC would have lost to UCLA, Michigan State, and Georgia Tech [that comes to mind]...Also, a Reggie Bush push beat ND.

    If Notre Dame wasn't Notre Dame, they wouldn't have been playing in the Sugar Bowl. Quinn's collegiate career was quite good. The coaching he has had was quite good. His teammates, defense, offensive line, etc; not so much.

    I don't think you can emphasis those games as much as people are trying too. ND wasn't suppose to win. Their name is big, but the talent differentials between them and LSU/USC/Michigan/OSU are vast...

    Let's get some activity going in the Cleveland sub-forum!

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by bigbluedefense View Post
      I think however, what that stat fails to acknowledge is that the "bust" rate of later round qbs is probably even higher than 1st round qbs.

      While it may be 50% for 1st round qbs, later round qbs who go on to become solid to great NFL qbs is more close to 20%.

      I think the bottomline is you shouldn't go after the "franchise" qb until you have the pieces around him that can put him in a position to be successful.
      I loved this post...

      Let's get some activity going in the Cleveland sub-forum!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Achilles33 View Post
        Hell yea BBD. Quinn is a good QB. Russell is a freakin fat, stupid, bust.
        Great intelligent post

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
          I share the exact same sentiment. Alls I want at QB is a smart guy who won't committ turnovers. Defense and the Running game rule all.
          I would disagree slightly. I do believe you have to have a QB capable of making plays. You don't have to have Brady or Manning, but it sure helps your odds. Really, you can count on one hand the number of teams that have won a SB with the "bus driver" QB. Your odds go way up with a top QB that can make plays.
          In war, you win or lose, live or die - and the difference is just an eyelash.


          -Douglas MacArthur

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Macarthur View Post
            I would disagree slightly. I do believe you have to have a QB capable of making plays. You don't have to have Brady or Manning, but it sure helps your odds. Really, you can count on one hand the number of teams that have won a SB with the "bus driver" QB. Your odds go way up with a top QB that can make plays.
            How many of those QBs won without a very strong defense and strong running game? Often times those 2 things can make a QB look better than he is. I would even venture to say that Troy Aikman was exactly what I said... A smart QB that won't make turnovers. ...a bus driver type? Maybe true.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
              How many of those QBs won without a very strong defense and strong running game? Often times those 2 things can make a QB look better than he is. I would even venture to say that Troy Aikman was exactly what I said... A smart QB that won't make turnovers. ...a bus driver type? Maybe true.
              Aikman was the most accurate passer of all time if I'm not mistaken...he was far from a Trent Dilfer type quarterback.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by D-Unit View Post
                How many of those QBs won without a very strong defense and strong running game? Often times those 2 things can make a QB look better than he is. I would even venture to say that Troy Aikman was exactly what I said... A smart QB that won't make turnovers. ...a bus driver type? Maybe true.
                But it's a chicken and egg situation. There's no question Dilfer would not have won one without that great defense. The problem is that with championship teams the two are not mutually exclusive. There's a reason why great teams win. I just think history shows that most of the teams that win have QBs that are at least in the upper third of the league.

                And I would agree with Rule. Aikman made big-time throws very consistently.
                In war, you win or lose, live or die - and the difference is just an eyelash.


                -Douglas MacArthur

                Comment


                • #23
                  I think if you're going to talk Super Bowl winners, then you have a well rounded team. With all that said, a quarterback is one of the most important positions and is needed for that well rounded team (as is the LT, RB, playmaker on offense, that guy that is money whenever you need him to be, clutch kicker, good defense, superb coaching, etc).

                  I think if you're talking Super Bowl caliber teams, they are almost complete packages [even if it's JUST that year]. The field general of the offense is almost a staple in those caliber of teams...

                  Let's get some activity going in the Cleveland sub-forum!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Here's the deal. To be a consistantly winning team you need good QB play.

                    Any team that has been good for 4+ years in a row has a very good QB during that stretch. Any team can catch lighting in a bottle and win for one year without one (Baltimore, Tampa Bay, etc) but the consistant winners all have one thing in common; QB play.

                    Designs by Thule



                    Originally posted by DMWSackMachine
                    I just wanna warn you guys not to take TNew41 too seriously. He's....let's just say, special. He's fairly harmless, though. He just needs several years of seasoning before he tries to make any more points, is all.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by LSUALUM99 View Post
                      Here's the deal. To be a consistantly winning team you need good QB play.

                      Any team that has been good for 4+ years in a row has a very good QB during that stretch. Any team can catch lighting in a bottle and win for one year without one (Baltimore, Tampa Bay, etc) but the consistant winners all have one thing in common; QB play.
                      I think me and D-Unit are being mistaken as saying that a "bus driver" qb equates to Trent Dilfer.


                      Im not trying to say that at all. What Im saying is, that a team built on minimizing the need for stellar qb play, built on defense and the run game are often the more successful teams as a whole.

                      If you want consistent success, you need a defense and a run game. Look at Philadelphia. Theyve won without McNabb in a pass happy WCO not just this past year, but even prior to that. Because of stellar defense, and in their case, great oline play.

                      Now to be a championship team, of course you need that qb to get you over the hump. But you don't need a Peyton Manning. You can win championships with a bus driver type of qb who can make plays when need be. Bus driver is often considered a derogatory term for a qb. I don't feel that way at all. Thats what I want out of my offense.

                      Just because a qb is given the role of bus driver, doesn't mean he can't make plays. I would favor a bus driver type of offense run by a qb who can make plays when called upon. I think to a certain extent, Aikman was a bus driver. Simms was a busdriver. Bradshaw was a bus driver. All the SB teams by the Skins had bus driver qbs.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by pocketaces View Post
                        Pat jones who was head coach at Oklahoma state and an assistant coach in Oakland and Miami is now on our sports talk radio. He said that he talked to some people from the Dolphins and they told him that Quinn was rated so far away from their #9 pick that they couldn't justify taking him. They also told him they had Beck rated closer to Quinn than they had Quinn rated to the #9 pick. Just thought that was interesting and wanted to share.

                        Is this the same Dolphins team that fell in love with Ronnie Brown -- a guy they now hate in South Florida -- when they had the more productive Cadillac Williams to pick.

                        SO instead of Quinn they go Ted Ginn? Huh?

                        That franchise has some very very dumb football people.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X

                        Debug Information