Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 You are drafting a prospect, not a player. You have no idea what kind of player he'll become, therefore you evaluate all variables, including conference. NO, when you draft him, he is a player. When you two players with similar stats and similar measurables, you take the guy who did it against better talent. When scouts bottom line this, there is no such thing. You don't have to agree with it. But Shaw is a better prospect than Renner. He may be, but it has nothing to do with the fact that he played in the SEC and the other guy didn't. Just because you fail to accept that the SEC is a far superior conference compared to the Big Ten doesn't make it any less accurate. Has nothing to do with the Big Ten or anywhere else....it has to do with "who is/will be better". Pierre Garcon is a pretty darn good receiver. He played DIII ball....so it was irrelevent. You try to choose a good player. The SEC finished with 7 Top 25 teams. The Bug Ten had 3. The SEC had just as many Top 5 teams as the Big Ten did Top 25 teams. Are we talking about the College rankings....or about guys playing professional football? I thought it was the latter. The only thing that's irrelevant in this argument are the QB's you listed. Each one of them played for Top 25 ranked teams and played ranked, quality out of conference opponents. Unlike Renner. Unlike Carr. Unlike Garropolo. Tony Romo or Joe Flacco would have been more apt comparisons, as they didn't play nearly the same level of talent in college as their counterparts. I think you just made my point. Flacco/Romo/BR all came from smaller schools. Is it more likely that the "Power Conferences" would produce more better players? Certainly, because they naturally generally recruit the better talent. But that is not the be all end all. E.g. : I truly don't know anything much about this Renner or Shaw. I only saw some snippets of games played by South Carolina this year, and probably none by Renner, wherever he went to school. But, am I automatically going to conclude that Shaw will make a better Pro Quarterback prospect than Renner just because he played in the SEC? Hell no. Wherever these guys played the NFL scouts must do their due diligence on them. If your point is Flacco/Romo, it's a weak point. They're the only two starting QB's in the league from non-Division 1 schools. If your argument is that conference affiliation isn't the end-all, be-all of talent, then it's a stupid one. Of course there are exceptions, as there are in every fact of life. That's just taking a firm stance on a weak point for no reason other than to argue. The fact is there are more quarterbacks from power conferences than there are those from mid-level conferences. It's not debatable. It's proven. What you are trying to debate, unsuccessfully I may add, is that quarterbacks from mid-major/division 2/division 3 schools are just as successful in the NFL, which is also untrue. You don't have to believe scouts don't look at conference affiliation, but the stats prove that they do: 30 of the 32 starting QB's are from Division 1 schools. 7 of those are from teams affiliated with the SEC, most in the league. Trying to misdirect the conversation to invalidate my facts isn't going to work. We are talking about both college and the pros. The fact that the SEC has 3 of the top 5 teams is a valid point, and just because you can't disprove it doesn't mean it's not applicable. With scouting being the in exact science that it is, of course every variable measurable will be included. And one of those variables is conference power. As I've stated before, and most have agreed with except you, if there are two players with similar measurables and similar production, the one from the stronger conference is the better prospect. Shaw played equally as well, if not better, against higher quality talent throughout the duration of his career. There's literally zero scouts that have Renner ranked anywhere near Shaw. Shaw is ranked as a top ten at his position, where Renner has trouble cracking Top-20. Considering their statistics are pretty similar, I wonder what variable they're factoring in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Shaw?? 6'nothing, 200 lbs soaking wet, with an extensive injury history? With a 2013 completion percentage of only 63.4%, good for 38th in FBS I-A... Sure he plays in the SEC, but other than the bowl game against Wisconsin, his 4 best games this year came against unranked Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, and Coastal Carolina... Comparing him to Renner is one thing. Comparing him to Manziel (who played in the same conference) is laughable... I don't think Manziel is a top 10 pick, but he can easily be a 1st rounder while Shaw is a 6th or 7th pick who you hope turns into a decent backup... I don't understand the Shaw/Manziel comparison either. Shaw is a good late round prospect, but is nowhere near the prospect Manziel is. I will say this, however. Shaw wins games. It's a worn-out cliche, but Shaw simply wins. He rarely, if ever, put South Carolina in a position to lose. He played smart, efficient football and didn't lack any explosiveness while doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Yeah, I know he's under a big contract, I didn't start the rumor ... just saying the Browns would be crazy not to take him if they were offered. Romo at QB, a RB like Tre Mason, a few uprgrades here and there and we have as much or better talent than anyone in the division. Zombo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 If your point is Flacco/Romo, it's a weak point. They're the only two starting QB's in the league from non-Division 1 schools. If your argument is that conference affiliation isn't the end-all, be-all of talent, then it's a stupid one. Of course there are exceptions, as there are in every fact of life. That's just taking a firm stance on a weak point for no reason other than to argue. NO, you are the one being absurd: Your hypothesis is: take the SEC QB because he has played tougher competition. I am arguing that point vis a vis all other QBs. I am saying if a QB is good, he is good.....he is not good/better just because he played in the SEC The fact is there are more quarterbacks from power conferences than there are those from mid-level conferences. It's not debatable. It's proven. I never claimed otherwise....I simply state that power conferences do not have exclusivity on producing NFL caliber QBs....that you CAN get them from other sources.....not that those other sources predominate. What you are trying to debate, unsuccessfully I may add, is that quarterbacks from mid-major/division 2/division 3 schools are just as successful in the NFL, which is also untrue. NO, NO, NO. See above....I am saying you have to look at the player. Sure, the more talented players go to power conferences.....but not every single goddamn one does. You don't have to believe scouts don't look at conference affiliation, but the stats prove that they do: 30 of the 32 starting QB's are from Division 1 schools. 7 of those are from teams affiliated with the SEC, most in the league. You need to break that down....because that is not what I am coming up with. (Probably due to question of there being several teams who you must ask: who is the starting QB). Trying to misdirect the conversation to invalidate my facts isn't going to work. We are talking about both college and the pros. NO, you may be talking about college....I am talking about NFL Quarterbacks. The fact that the SEC has 3 of the top 5 teams is a valid point, and just because you can't disprove it doesn't mean it's not applicable. That fact is inapplicable to who are the top prospects to be an NFL QB in this draft? Bridgewater/Bortles/Carr/Manziel.....only one of them played in the SEC (and that team just joined). I am saying I don't care what conference these prospects played in....who is going to be a good pro, that is what I want to know. Hell, beyond those 4 CBS has the next ranked QBs as Carr/Fresno St., Brett Smith/Wyoming, Fales/San Jose St.. then you have Garropolo....and after that some 4-5-6 round prospects from the SEC: Mettenberger/Shaw/McCarron. With scouting being the in exact science that it is, of course every variable measurable will be included. And one of those variables is conference power. As I've stated before, and most have agreed with except you, if there are two players with similar measurables and similar production, the one from the stronger conference is the better prospect. Shaw played equally as well, if not better, against higher quality talent throughout the duration of his career. There's literally zero scouts that have Renner ranked anywhere near Shaw. Shaw is ranked as a top ten at his position, where Renner has trouble cracking Top-20. Considering their statistics are pretty similar, I wonder what variable they're factoring in. Well, as noted: I don't even see Renner on the CBS list of QB prospects....but Shaw is in there...ranked 13th best prospect. All I can conclude is that people think that he must be a better QB prospect.....because he is a better QB prospect, not because he played in the SEC....or else they would have ranked him higher than Fales/Smith etc. So...by those CBS analysts opionion....things are not similar/equal vis a vis Shaw/Renner. (And don't rely just on "statistics" Anthony Calvillo has 80,000 passing yards in the CFL....do you think he ranks with Favre/Manning/Brady on the QB scale?) No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEVELandMILIDH Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Manziel's gonna be better than Romo but I would love to have Tony throwing to Josh Gordon and Jordan Cameron, with a top 5 defense. You'd be insane not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sig570 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 romo has to get back surgery for a disc he ruptured while playing; i dont know if he will be the same QB after the surgery or if he will recover fully. back surgeries can be very trickey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuwoohio Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Why would Dallas trade with us if they wanted Manziel for sure. There's no guarentee he would be there at 4. We may have to move up if that's who we really want. Romo's had plenty of time to prove himself, and he still hasn't. When the FO solicits my opinion, I tell them no way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I think they would make Pittsburgh our bitch. Let's do it. Zombo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canton Mike Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 I want Manziel (INSTANT excitement from the Fans) with our 1st pick, BUT with his boom/bust potential, I advocate getting a Garoppollo, McCarron, Mettenberger, etc in the 3rd. I think that insures that we have a roster QB & maybe 2 from this draft. We still have plenty of picks to fill our other needs, & the draft better be good, 'cuz I think the Browns have shot themselves in the foot as far as FA goes. Again......We'll see. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEinCHI Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Hey Mike, I like the idea of drafting a higher boom/bust risk guy with #4 and selecting another QB in with one of our 4th round picks. Bring the two newbs in to compete against Hoyer and another vet and see who is left standing between our 4th round pick and the vet and if that #4 pick can hang beat out Hoyer. Washington did this with RGIII and Cousins and it worked out...well.. it worked out on paper:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7moses7 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Renner is at #23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEinCHI Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 haha, awesome! Interesting personality shift going from coaching Kurt Warner to Johnny Football haha (granted a few years ago) but I like both Kenny the Hut and Johnny Football, think of all the nicknames and memes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownB499 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Am I missing something????Thought you couldn't interview coaches from teams still in the playoffs??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombo Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 Am I missing something????Thought you couldn't interview coaches from teams still in the playoffs??? You can do it with the team's permission I believe. Looks like he has three interviews lined up this week ... Tits today, Lions tomorrow, us on Saturday. If I was the Chargers HC or Owner, that wouldn't sit well with me. Zombo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownB499 Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 If I was the Chargers HC or Owner, that wouldn't sit well with me. Zombo Trust me Mr.Spanos...I'll been in Denver in plenty off time to catch the second half Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLEinCHI Posted January 9, 2014 Report Share Posted January 9, 2014 They can interview but can not be hired until the season is over. I agree Zombo that seems like a bit of a distraction going the biggest game in SD since the LT days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Hey Mike, I like the idea of drafting a higher boom/bust risk guy with #4 and selecting another QB in with one of our 4th round picks. Bring the two newbs in to compete against Hoyer and another vet and see who is left standing between our 4th round pick and the vet and if that #4 pick can hang beat out Hoyer. Washington did this with RGIII and Cousins and it worked out...well.. it worked out on paper:) The RG3/Cousins comparison is quite apt if we go with Manziel. I think Manziel/Garopollo would be a very similar situation. One QB who is a complete athlete and then a late round prospect who is technically sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TypicalBrowns Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 get Watkins at 4, trade down the 2nd 1st rounder for a top 10-15 pick for a qb.Sammy is a sure thing, unlike every QB being touted in this draft as "1st round quality"waiting for the qb even past round one sounds cool with me, get the fucking team better. Still multiple holes to fill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcam222 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Manziel's gonna be better than Romo but I would love to have Tony throwing to Josh Gordon and Jordan Cameron, with a top 5 defense. You'd be insane not to. What we know for sure though is Romo will be Romo and Manziel will be ??????? who the hell knows how his game will really translate. I also would trade picks with them and take Romo in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 It is January 9th and I am stating TAKE JOHNNY FOOTBALL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffinwv Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 RGIII had a good first year...hurt in his second...it seems like everyone is killing him for this...but Brady was out a year..peyton out a year...arron Rodgers was out half this year... Almost every QB gets hurt...almost everyone gets hurt period... If he is drafted and taught well, and I hear he is a student of the game and listens and prepares like crazy...why cant he do great? I think he is definatley worth a shot...hell it cant be any worse...I would just for once like to see the Browns with the running QB and the "lucky" guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffinwv Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I heard where Nick Saban said Manziel was much better this year than last against Bama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark O Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Before the latest back surgery I would've taken Romo in a heartbeat as our QB. There would have to be some concern now though when you're talking about a 34 year old dude with 2 back surgeries and how long can he stay healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffinwv Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 hes got three..maybe four years tops left.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 I was not on his band wagon at first, but now seeing as this JOKE of a FO can't get a coach. I WANT JOHNNY FOOTBALL...................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 Romo = NOTHING he has never won shit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcam222 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 hes got three..maybe four years tops left.. just the right amount of time for us to use him up while we draft 4 to 10 QB prospects to school behind him LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 just the right amount of time for us to use him up while we draft 4 to 10 QB prospects to school behind him LOL school behind a loser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcam222 Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 school behind a loser Romo = NOTHING he has never won shit If you don't think he would be an immediate upgrade over every QB we have had since the return you are a fool. I am actually a big fan of Hoyer getting a fair shot here but Romo is far from a loser. You stick him out there with Gordon, Cameron, a number 2 WR we draft and there would be fireworks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrownsKidd Posted January 10, 2014 Report Share Posted January 10, 2014 No way I want Romo on this team. Talk about the ability to lose games, Romo is the master Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.