Hockey5djh Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 1 minute ago, O'Doyle Rules said: How did that work out last year? 7-9 Eagles 1-15 Browns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raidersedge Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 I'd take Wentz. I think he is gonna be high level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y2lamanaki Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 23 minutes ago, Danger said: This is incredibly poor logic to base off of. One is a program that's been around and you have a track record of failure to go off of. Another is something without previous indication of success or failure. The first player to play in the NFL from North Dakota St. was Rudy Rosatti in 1923. Only the 1960s didn't see a player from North Dakota St. in the NFL. That seems like plenty of time for a QB or two to play at North Dakota St. to me. Or, to put this another way, Joe Montana was drafted from Notre Dame in 1979, so we can both likely agree that the last good QB drafted from Notre Dame was drafted in 1979. If we determine a successful QB to be one that wins games that you can build a team around, we have this: -Successful Michigan QBs drafted in the NFL since 1979 other than Tom Brady: 0 (Unless you want to build around Jim Harbaugh) -Successful Tennessee QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Peyton Manning: 0 -Successful Purdue QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Drew Brees: 0 -Successful USC QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Carson Palmer: 0 -Successful SMU QBs ever drafted: 0 (including Josh McCown) -Successful Ole Miss QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Eli Manning: 0 -Successful Miami (OH) QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Ben Roethlisberger: 0 -Successful NC St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Phillip Rivers: 0 (including Mike Glennon) -Successful Utah QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Alex Smith: 0 (0 maybe including Smith) -Successful California QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Aaron Rodgers: 0 (including for now, Goff) -Successful Vanderbilt QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Jay Cutler: 0 (probably 0 including Jay Cutler) -Successful Georgia QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Matt Stafford: 0 -Successful Oklahoma QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Sam Bradford: 0 -Successful Auburn QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Cam Newton: 0 -Successful TCU QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Andy Dalton: 0 (probably 0 including Andy Dalton) -Successful Wisconsin QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Russel Wilson: 0 -Successful Michigan St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Kirk Cousins: 0 (probably 0 including Kirk Cousins, and also including Brian Hoyer) -Successful Fresno St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Derek Carr: 0 (unless you want to build around Trent Dilfer) -Successful Florida St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Jameis Winston: 0 (unless you want to build around Brad Johnson) -Successful Oregon QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Marcus Mariota: 0 -Successful Northwestern QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Trevor Siemian: 0 (including Siemien likely) -Successful Miss. St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Dak Prescott: 0 -Successful Clemson QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than DeShaun Watson: 0 ^All of these schools have produced the same amount of successful QBs in the NFL since 1979 as Notre Dame has. Arguably, most of them have not produced the same amount of successful QBs in the NFL since 1979 as Notre Dame. Does this mean you would not have drafted any of the above players? Most are big schools with the same amount of success. Not really seeing the NFL QB factory. Other notable schools: -North Carolina: 0 (jury out on Trubisky) -Texas Tech: 0 (jury out on Mahomes) -Louisville: 0 (jury out on Bridgewater) Schools with 1 notable success story since 1979: -Southern Miss: 1 (Brett Favre) -Syracuse: 1 (Donovan McNabb) -Eastern Illinois: 1 (Tony Romo, and he wasn't drafted, jury out on Garoppolo) -Pittsburgh: 1 (Dan Marino) -Miami (FL): 1 (Jim Kelly, unless you want to build around Vinny Testaverde) So that leaves: -Successful Boston College QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Matt Ryan: 1 (Matt Hasselbeck) -Successful Delaware QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Joe Flacco: 1 (Rich Gannon) -Successful Virginia Tech QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Tyrod Taylor: 1 (Michael Vick, and realistically, probably only Vick) -Successful Stanford QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Andrew Luck: 1 (John Elway) -Successful UCF QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Blake Bortles: 1 (Daunte Culpepper, and realistically, only Culpepper, and even more realistically, only the first 5 years of Culpepper) and: BYU: 2 (Steve Young, though technically wasn't drafted by the NFL, and Jim McMahon) UCLA: 2 (Troy Aikman and maybe Jay Schroeder) Washington: 2 (Warren Moon, though not technically drafted by the NFL, and Mark Brunell...maybe 3 if you want to build around Chris Chandler) ^Certainly, I can not see you advocate only drafting from those 8 schools because they have had exactly one more QB from their school have a successful career than Notre Dame did, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLick12 Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 2 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said: The first player to play in the NFL from North Dakota St. was Rudy Rosatti in 1923. Only the 1960s didn't see a player from North Dakota St. in the NFL. That seems like plenty of time for a QB or two to play at North Dakota St. to me. Or, to put this another way, Joe Montana was drafted from Notre Dame in 1979, so we can both likely agree that the last good QB drafted from Notre Dame was drafted in 1979. If we determine a successful QB to be one that wins games that you can build a team around, we have this: -Successful Michigan QBs drafted in the NFL since 1979 other than Tom Brady: 0 (Unless you want to build around Jim Harbaugh) -Successful Tennessee QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Peyton Manning: 0 -Successful Purdue QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Drew Brees: 0 -Successful USC QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Carson Palmer: 0 -Successful SMU QBs ever drafted: 0 (including Josh McCown) -Successful Ole Miss QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Eli Manning: 0 -Successful Miami (OH) QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Ben Roethlisberger: 0 -Successful NC St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Phillip Rivers: 0 (including Mike Glennon) -Successful Utah QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Alex Smith: 0 (0 maybe including Smith) -Successful California QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Aaron Rodgers: 0 (including for now, Goff) -Successful Vanderbilt QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Jay Cutler: 0 (probably 0 including Jay Cutler) -Successful Georgia QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Matt Stafford: 0 -Successful Oklahoma QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Sam Bradford: 0 -Successful Auburn QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Cam Newton: 0 -Successful TCU QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Andy Dalton: 0 (probably 0 including Andy Dalton) -Successful Wisconsin QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Russel Wilson: 0 -Successful Michigan St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Kirk Cousins: 0 (probably 0 including Kirk Cousins, and also including Brian Hoyer) -Successful Fresno St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Derek Carr: 0 (unless you want to build around Trent Dilfer) -Successful Florida St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Jameis Winston: 0 (unless you want to build around Brad Johnson) -Successful Oregon QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Marcus Mariota: 0 -Successful Northwestern QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Trevor Siemian: 0 (including Siemien likely) -Successful Miss. St. QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Dak Prescott: 0 -Successful Clemson QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than DeShaun Watson: 0 ^All of these schools have produced the same amount of successful QBs in the NFL since 1979 as Notre Dame has. Arguably, most of them have not produced the same amount of successful QBs in the NFL since 1979 as Notre Dame. Does this mean you would not have drafted any of the above players? Most are big schools with the same amount of success. Not really seeing the NFL QB factory. Other notable schools: -North Carolina: 0 (jury out on Trubisky) -Texas Tech: 0 (jury out on Mahomes) -Louisville: 0 (jury out on Bridgewater) Schools with 1 notable success story since 1979: -Southern Miss: 1 (Brett Favre) -Syracuse: 1 (Donovan McNabb) -Eastern Illinois: 1 (Tony Romo, and he wasn't drafted, jury out on Garoppolo) -Pittsburgh: 1 (Dan Marino) -Miami (FL): 1 (Jim Kelly, unless you want to build around Vinny Testaverde) So that leaves: -Successful Boston College QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Matt Ryan: 1 (Matt Hasselbeck) -Successful Delaware QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Joe Flacco: 1 (Rich Gannon) -Successful Virginia Tech QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Tyrod Taylor: 1 (Michael Vick, and realistically, probably only Vick) -Successful Stanford QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Andrew Luck: 1 (John Elway) -Successful UCF QBs in the NFL since 1979 other than Blake Bortles: 1 (Daunte Culpepper, and realistically, only Culpepper, and even more realistically, only the first 5 years of Culpepper) and: BYU: 2 (Steve Young, though technically wasn't drafted by the NFL, and Jim McMahon) UCLA: 2 (Troy Aikman and maybe Jay Schroeder) Washington: 2 (Warren Moon, though not technically drafted by the NFL, and Mark Brunell...maybe 3 if you want to build around Chris Chandler) ^Certainly, I can not see you advocate only drafting from those 8 schools because they have had exactly one more QB from their school have a successful career than Notre Dame did, right? Wow, you really put way too much time and research into that, but props to you. It's a bad argument that he's making, it's pretty cut and dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y2lamanaki Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, BLick12 said: Wow, you really put way too much time and research into that, but props to you. It's a bad argument that he's making, it's pretty cut and dry. I tend to put way too much time into a lot of things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 Seriously....thats an effort football you just earned right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LETSGOBROWNIES Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Hockey5djh said: Eagles 1-0 Browns 0-1 Do you think the Browns made a deal that involves picks yet to be made with the expectation to win immediately? What's your point here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 2 hours ago, y2lamanaki said: Regarding the thread topic, I go with the haul over Wentz. I don't foresee Wentz being a top 10 QB at any point in the near future with Newton, Wilson, Luck, Carr, Winston, and Mariota for sure ahead of him (that's 6 among young QBs as of now), and then uncertainties in Prescott, Goff, Trubisky, Watson, Kizer, and Mahomes to go along with Wentz among first or second year QBs, and then on top of that - even more uncertainty in Darnold, Rosen, Allen, Jackson, and others coming out of college in the near future. This isn't to even begin to contemplate where Cousins, Garoppolo, or Bridgewater might rank in the near future. And that's not even touching the elite QBs ahead of all of these players that are still playing as well. If Wentz isn't a sure-fire top 10 guy (and to me, he's not), I see no point in giving up that much for the chance with just as many talented QBs coming along the way. If the best QBs go #1 and #2 overall, and the worst teams are the teams without a QB, then eventually, you'll luck into your QB without sacrificing needed depth and potentially gifted starters on your team. I'll take a chance that what Cleveland has done with these picks will net them more than what the Eagles get in Wentz just by sheer odds. Why are we arbitrarily making the cut off top 10? If Carson Wentz turns out to be the franchise QB the Eagles believed he would become when they drafted him, that's a success regardless of where he stacks up compared to the rest of the league's QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y2lamanaki Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 6 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Why are we arbitrarily making the cut off top 10? If Carson Wentz turns out to be the franchise QB the Eagles believed he would become when they drafted him, that's a success regardless of where he stacks up compared to the rest of the league's QBs. Well if top 10 isn't the cutoff for a franchise QB, that means close to half the league has found a franchise QB without having to give up that sort of haul, to me proving the lack of necessity. If you aren't trading away multiple first and second round picks for even a top 10 QB, then you should definitely not be making that trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 56 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said: I tend to put way too much time into a lot of things As you should have to if you're going to besmirch the stellar reputation of Joey Heisman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y2lamanaki Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 1 minute ago, The LBC said: As you should have to if you're going to besmirch the stellar reputation of Joey Heisman. Does it help if I say I consider him to be on a plane of success far beyond what any mere mortal could achieve, and thus did not think it proper to lower the reputation of other lesser QBs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said: Well if top 10 isn't the cutoff for a franchise QB, that means close to half the league has found a franchise QB without having to give up that sort of haul, to me proving the lack of necessity. If you aren't trading away multiple first and second round picks for even a top 10 QB, then you should definitely not be making that trade. Again, I think you're hastily making a judgement based on a lack of facts. I'll use the Miami Dolphins for example. They're routinely picking in that 10-24 range year after year, which is generally far enough away from being able to be in a position to draft a franchise QB via the draft. So them trading up to ensure they get their QB is a necessity, because they'd otherwise not have that ability to do so. IF the Eagles didn't trade up for Carson Wentz, whose their starting QB? Sam Bradford. A guy whose probably at best a back-end top 20 QB without any real legitimate upside. At the end of the day, he's not someone whose going to change the fortune for the Eagles. Wentz could be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistakey Posted September 12, 2017 Author Share Posted September 12, 2017 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Again, I think you're hastily making a judgement based on a lack of facts. I'll use the Miami Dolphins for example. They're routinely picking in that 10-24 range year after year, which is generally far enough away from being able to be in a position to draft a franchise QB via the draft. So them trading up to ensure they get their QB is a necessity, because they'd otherwise not have that ability to do so. IF the Eagles didn't trade up for Carson Wentz, whose their starting QB? Sam Bradford. A guy whose probably at best a back-end top 20 QB without any real legitimate upside. At the end of the day, he's not someone whose going to change the fortune for the Eagles. Wentz could be. so if top 10 is the questionable arbitrary cutoff for franchise qbs, where should it be? because as per your own admission sam bradford is a backend top 20 qb without any real legitimate upside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 1 minute ago, mistakey said: so if top 10 is the questionable arbitrary cutoff for franchise qbs, where should it be? because as per your own admission sam bradford is a backend top 20 qb without any real legitimate upside I'm not sure you can just pick and choose a cut off. Is he a franchise QB, yes or no? IF the answer is yes, than the trade was worth it from the Eagles' perspective. If the answer is no, than obviously they shouldn't have done the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLick12 Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 9 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Again, I think you're hastily making a judgement based on a lack of facts. I'll use the Miami Dolphins for example. They're routinely picking in that 10-24 range year after year, which is generally far enough away from being able to be in a position to draft a franchise QB via the draft. So them trading up to ensure they get their QB is a necessity, because they'd otherwise not have that ability to do so. IF the Eagles didn't trade up for Carson Wentz, whose their starting QB? Sam Bradford. A guy whose probably at best a back-end top 20 QB without any real legitimate upside. At the end of the day, he's not someone whose going to change the fortune for the Eagles. Wentz could be. Why? Especially if your definition of a franchise QB is not necessarily a top 10 QB, why do they need to trade up then? I'm with @y2lamanaki and feel if you're going to trade a first +++ for an unproven rookie, they better end up being a top 10 QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.