ramblin Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Everybody seems to want to throw out the stat lines of other QB's in trying to justify where Manziel is at in his career. So let's look at two stat lines: 1. 15-23, 198 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT, QBR 72.8, passer rating 92.3 2. 15-33, 168 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, QBR 71.8, passer rating 71.3 The first line is Brian Hoyer's from last year's game in Cincinnati that the Browns won 24-3 to go to 6-3 on the season and if I remember right, first place in the division. The second line is Johnny Manziel's from this year's game in Cincinnati that the Browns lost 31-10 to fall to 2-7 and last place in the division. Despite being in first place, many fans were unhappy with the first QB line and, amazingly, no credit given to Hoyer for having the Browns in first place. Probably fair to say that was simply because Manziel wasn't playing. That part of the fan base, led by the buffoon Chuck Booms, was actually unhappy, despite winning, because Johnny wasn't playing. It amazes me that those same people who derided the first stat line are now arguing that the second stat line is actually good. Something we should be happy with from our starting QB in a game that the team got thrashed in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richiswhere Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Everybody seems to want to throw out the stat lines of other QB's in trying to justify where Manziel is at in his career. So let's look at two stat lines: 1. 15-23, 198 yards, 0 TD, 0 INT, QBR 72.8, passer rating 92.3 2. 15-33, 168 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, QBR 71.8, passer rating 71.3 The first line is Brian Hoyer's from last year's game in Cincinnati that the Browns won 24-3 to go to 6-3 on the season and if I remember right, first place in the division. The second line is Johnny Manziel's from this year's game in Cincinnati that the Browns lost 31-10 to fall to 2-7 and last place in the division. Despite being in first place, many fans were unhappy with the first QB line and, amazingly, no credit given to Hoyer for having the Browns in first place. Probably fair to say that was simply because Manziel wasn't playing. That part of the fan base, led by the buffoon Chuck Booms, was actually unhappy, despite winning, because Johnny wasn't playing. It amazes me that those same people who derided the first stat line are now arguing that the second stat line is actually good. Something we should be happy with from our starting QB in a game that the team got thrashed in. So if i'm getting your post right you are saying that Manziel 10 points would have been enough to win last years game and Hoyer's 24 point wouldn't have been enough to win this years game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblin Posted November 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 No, not at all. The games aren't really an apples to apples comparison anyway. I'm saying it is all about perception and pointing out that perception is very rose-colored when it comes to Manziel by a lot of people. Despite winning against Cincy and being 6-3 and in first place, Hoyer was trashed last year. Yet a very similar performance, in a losing effort, by Manziel is being praised as proof he is on his way to the HOF. There is a lot of comparison of stats between Manziel and other very successful quarterbacks in an effort to justify Manziel's mediocre at best play so far. I just wanted to give a similar stat line comparison. Let's face it, being better than he was last year is not the same as being good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.