Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

If first round QBs are "destined busts" as people like to refer them to...


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
90 replies to this topic

#37 frash.exe

frash.exe

    Freddy Frashbear

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,279
  • Reputation: 5,871
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:32 PM

So in other words how you feel about the issue is more important than facts.

Brohm looked horrible this year evetime he took the field. Ramsey had plenty of talent around him. Harrington sucked no matter where he went.

Still are you saying we should have taken Joey instead of Julius? Grossman instead of Gross? Clemens instead of Dwill?


I can't answer that, I don't have a crystal ball, but by the same coin...

Should the Steelers have taken Gamble over Roethlisberger?

Should the Giants have traded for Gamble instead of Eli?

Should the Ravens have stood pat at 9 and picked Derrick Harvey instead of Flacco?

you can sit on your assertions that, while, YES, the Panthers have gotten great production out of our first rounders and that DeAngelo was a better pick than Clemens. But you really think any of the players we have picked have made a bigger impact for their team than Big Ben has for the Steelers? I don't think so, since none of those guys we have drafted have a ring on their finger.

#38 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 13,865
  • Reputation: 4,621
Administrators

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:33 PM

How do you know those players would have made the same impact here?

#39 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    Blazing Trails Thru the NFC South

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,332
  • Reputation: 4,585
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:37 PM

So in other words how you feel about the issue is more important than facts.

Brohm looked horrible this year evetime he took the field. Ramsey had plenty of talent around him. Harrington sucked no matter where he went.

Still are you saying we should have taken Joey instead of Julius? Grossman instead of Gross? Clemens instead of Dwill?



I'm a little confused, did Brohm even hit the field this year ?

http://www.nfl.com/p...le?id=BRO095850

Edited by Kevin Greene, 18 January 2009 - 11:40 PM.


#40 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,516
Moderators

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:41 PM

Why would a team use a top ten pick on a Boom or Bust corner when they could get a stud QB?

How do we know that Hurney would have not taken Big Ben if given the chance?

This is not a strong argument.

#41 frash.exe

frash.exe

    Freddy Frashbear

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,279
  • Reputation: 5,871
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:42 PM

How do you know those players would have made the same impact here?


How do you know those players wouldn't have made the same impact here?

None of us know either way, but I could tell you that, ineffective as he might look in Cleveland so far, maybe, just maybe Brady Quinn would have a better shot at succeeding with a better running game and a better defense to take the pressure off of him, like we've had.

Basically the only reasons people refuse to even think about first round QBs are because they think of David Carr before Peyton Manning, and have subconsciously grown to accept Fox's opinion that they don't play well enough.

And I don't think that Redskin fans, Steelers fans, Cowboys fans, Colts fans, Giants fans, Eagles fans etc would agree with you that it's a bad decision to make to draft a QB in the first round.

#42 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,516
Moderators

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:43 PM

I'm a little confused, did Brohm even hit the field this year ?

http://www.nfl.com/p...le?id=BRO095850


Preseason. He was dreadful.

Not saying he's a bust yet, but he didn't exactly wow anyone.

#43 Fox007

Fox007

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 27-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,502
  • Reputation: 1,582
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:45 PM

How do you know those players would have made the same impact here?




Easiest counter ever, how do you know those players wouldn't have made a BIGGER impact here than they did where they went?

The street goes both ways.

I know, I know, you were SOOOOOO obviously right.........:coolgleamA:

#44 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,516
Moderators

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:51 PM

So basically if we could have gotten Roethlisberger with the 28th pick of the draft, people would be happy with Fox and Hurney?

#45 frash.exe

frash.exe

    Freddy Frashbear

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,279
  • Reputation: 5,871
HUDDLER

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:54 PM

Why would a team use a top ten pick on a Boom or Bust corner when they could get a stud QB?

How do we know that Hurney would have not taken Big Ben if given the chance?

This is not a strong argument.


because when you consider that Jake Delhomme tore his elbow, required surgery, spent months in rehab, is 33 (at the time) and was deemed a major question mark by everybody else but Panthers fans, and the FO's best move to bolster QB is to trade a late round draft pick for a QB who was 2-7 as a starter for his previous team, you start to not really think they don't care much to getting a top prospect in as a young, talented option.

Hell, 2007 was as good an example of why we need a talented heir as you can see. Delhomme got hurt and we were caught with our pants down. And as far as what Carr was "supposed" to be when we signed him, he was shell-shocked and ruined by houston and he didn't even get a chance to really learn the playbook before he was thrown in.

#46 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,516
Moderators

Posted 18 January 2009 - 11:57 PM

So this is all about Flacco then? You were wanting them to take Flacco over Stewart?

#47 Fox007

Fox007

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 27-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,502
  • Reputation: 1,582
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:06 AM

So this is all about Flacco then? You were wanting them to take Flacco over Stewart?



I think his point is, that it doesn't matter what name your trying to dish out, that just because a QB was a bust for another team doesn't mean they would have busted for us.

Likely one of the successful ones would have sucked for us, who knows.

You won't ever get a stud QB like Manning or Rivers etc, etc, etc, if you never try.

You think Manning would be a perennial HOF if he played for the Panthers?

Most QB's do fail that are drafted in the first round, but they also go to a crap team most of the time.

#48 frash.exe

frash.exe

    Freddy Frashbear

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,279
  • Reputation: 5,871
HUDDLER

Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:07 AM

So this is all about Flacco then? You were wanting them to take Flacco over Stewart?


Who expected us to take Stewart in the first place then? IIRC he wasn't high on anybody's radar on here for us to draft. Most of us wanted one of the LTs or Derrick Harvey.

I know I wanted Clady, but if they drafted Flacco instead, I would've understood their motive. I also know that as far as this board is concerned, a Flacco pick at 13 would've elicited a collective gasp of horror for most of us. But that's not me. I don't hate on a draft pick that hasn't given me any reason to hate them, at least yet. A lot of people would've been pissed if we did it.