Jump to content

Is there an argument for Baker Mayfield #1 ?


bosko1616

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I never said it guaranteed success in the pros, I said he was actually good at playing football in college.

You can do better than strawman.

You posted data of seriously questionable validity to make what or no point?

Weak post, imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bruceb said:

You posted data of seriously questionable validity to make what or no point?

Weak post, imho.

What’s not valid about the data? You wanna run the numbers yourself and check?

The data is very valid, you’re just not subscribing to it because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

You can have whatever opinion you like of what Mayfield’s pro prospects may be, but to say he didn’t play well at the college level is full retard bruce, and you know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

What’s not valid about the data?

A mentor of mine advised me that the closer to truth, the better the lie, and the best lie is the truth.

They are truthful data in a vacuum.

To make/prove what point?

If it's to say/"prove" he played well in college, I must ask: So what?

Look at the names on the list and tell me that is worth a hill of beans.

Unless your point is that he was the best of a lot of garbage, except for Wilson.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bruceb said:

A mentor of mine advised me that the closer to truth, the better the lie, and the best lie is the truth.

They are truthful data in a vacuum.

To make/prove what point?

If it's to say/"prove" he played well in college, I must ask: So what?

Look at the names on the list and tell me that is worth a hill of beans.

Unless your point is that he was the best of a lot of garbage, except for Wilson.

 

You’re talking in circles here.

You’re trying to lawyer a pretty simple point and I’m not taking the bait bruceb, Esq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

You’re talking in circles here.

You’re trying to lawyer a pretty simple point and I’m not taking the bait bruceb, Esq.

You offered up the evidence/the "proof".

My only point is that it is bogus, misleading, half a loaf at best.

I don't think anyone in the forum cares that he was a good college football player.

More likely that they want to know whether he will be a good pro, for us, and the data you offered are not probative of that at all.

Quite the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bruceb said:

You offered up the evidence/the "proof".

My only point is that it is bogus, misleading, half a loaf at best.

I don't think anyone in the forum cares that he was a good college football player.

More likely that they want to know whether he will be a good pro, for us, and the data you offered are not probative of that at all.

Quite the opposite.

The data showed he played QB with a level of proficiency never seen before at the college level.

That seems like, at a minimum, fair evidence he was a good college football player.

What other evidence would you like? Awards? He’s got those too.

What is the measuring stick you’d accept? What objective data would satisfy you? I only ask because he’s been was statistically elite in almost every measurable category as has been shown multiple times in multiple threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, bruceb said:

A mentor of mine advised me that the closer to truth, the better the lie, and the best lie is the truth.

They are truthful data in a vacuum.

To make/prove what point?

If it's to say/"prove" he played well in college, I must ask: So what?

Look at the names on the list and tell me that is worth a hill of beans.

Unless your point is that he was the best of a lot of garbage, except for Wilson.

 

He had like 600 yards and 5 td to 1 int combined between His Ohio state and Georgia games.  Dude put up against good teams too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

The data showed he played QB with a level of proficiency never seen before at the college level.

That seems like, at a minimum, fair evidence he was a good college football player.

What other evidence would you like? Awards? He’s got those too.

What is the measuring stick you’d accept? What objective data would satisfy you? I only ask because he’s been was statistically elite in almost every measurable category as has been shown multiple times in multiple threads.

That's nice.

Let Dorsey pick him.

If he fails, I win and we lose.

If he succeeds, I eat some crow and win as a Browns fan, unless the team that takes Darnold wins a SB and in the cruelest irony against us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bruceb said:

More likely that they want to know whether he will be a good pro, for us, and the data you offered are not probative of that at all.

There is no data to indicate if any QB will be good as a pro. If there were this would be a lot easier. If Mayfield would have completed 60% of his passes with 29 TD and 13 INT would he be a better or worse NFL prospect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

There is no data to indicate if any QB will be good as a pro. If there were this would be a lot easier. If Mayfield would have completed 60% of his passes with 29 TD and 13 INT would he be a better or worse NFL prospect?

I agree, in general the stats are of little use as an indicator of pro potential. If he put up 29/13 within that same offense at Oklahoma, I guess I'd feel even more worried about him but in reality, and in his case specifically, the stats mean very little to me in terms of making him a better or worse prospect.

Colt Brennan went for 72% and 52TDs. Kellen Moore went for 74% and 43TDs.

There are numerous examples of great college players that put up gaudy stats and were not qualified to be successful pro QBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, duke2056 said:

If you arent able to figure that out, not sure it would help for me to explain it.  

Seems like some of you value college stats a bit too much.

Except that I've made my anti-Mayfield sentiments well known. Apparently you can't/don't read them, which is fine, but don't post snarky responses like this to me if you're being obtuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

Except that I've made my anti-Mayfield sentiments well known. Apparently you can't/don't read them, which is fine, but don't post snarky responses like this to me if you're being obtuse.

Not makin sense here.  You responded to a quote of mine that you couldn't understand.  It was very easy to understand.  "Results do not automatically mean better QB play than others".

I responded to you quoting me.  So, exactly what's your issue here?  Do you still not understand what I was saying?  Or do you and just want to argue about something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...