|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323
1st String
|
1st String
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323 |
well...sorta true. not bad stats i guess...but one of these things is not like the others...
SEASON CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT
2011 291 402 4293 72.4 10.68 87 37 6 27 189.5
2010 304 454 3501 67.0 7.71 94 22 8 20 144.2
2009 45 69 481 65.2 6.97 42 4 0 4 142.9
2008 160 267 2091 59.9 7.83 61 15 3 28 142.0
then by comparison
Year School Conf Class Pos Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate
2006 Texas Big 12 FR QB 217 318 68.2 2570 8.1 8.9 29 7 161.8
2007 Texas Big 12 SO QB 276 424 65.1 3303 7.8 6.9 22 18 139.2
2008 Texas Big 12 JR QB 332 433 76.7 3859 8.9 9.7 34 8 173.8
2009 Texas Big 12 SR QB 332 470 70.6 3521 7.5 7.5 27 12 147.4
its frightening how similar their college careers were, no?
this is why i dont put much stock into college numbers. its not a good indicator as to NFL success. its reasonable looking at the above to conclude that griffins last year was an anomaly. more damning than any stats, are the very real parts of his game that are missing. i'd probly be OK with him if our coaches showed any propensity to adjust to the players, but i fear they'd treat him the same as colt. force it down his throat and move on if he fails.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,445 |
Quote:
you sure all the flynn hate isn't because he laid OSU to waste in the national championship game?
Now THAT'S rock solid logic...
Go Browns!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
choco,
I'm not really interested in the stats. I watched quite a bit of baylor and the bottom line is the guy is incredibly accurate (puts the ball on the receivers in stride from the pocket, deadly deep ball, hits receivers when running) and has a very strong arm. He adjusts velocity well for the situation. These are things I don't really see in Colt. They both have good pocket escapability. Certainly not Big Ben level, but better than average. They're not the same prospect just because their college numbers are similar and both systems worked primarily from the shotgun.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323 |
lol....um....it was an inquiry simply to make you realize he's still done more than your hero...
ill assume your silence on the other points in that post reflect your inability to construct an ample retort.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
you bring up alot of good points there but Griffin had more than 1 good year.
Yes some very good points that I already agree with [bravo], but saying RG3 had one more good year (at baylor) is really irrelevant, don't you think? 
Flynn was not afforded that opportunity, so imo that falls into the unknown category and can not be used for a case for comparison sake.
I think that was a coaching decision and Les Miles is well known for sitting a QB to go with a different look at the position. I see no reason to think that if Flynn was given the opportunity, that he would not have performed to a level that is required.
One more year at Baylor hardly tells us anything on how he will or if he can make the transition to the League.
To reiterate one of those very good points. What system or philosophy he will go to will go a long way in determining how well his (or another's) chance of success will be.
Cam Newton would not have had the year that he had in this offense and I feel pretty confident in that statement or I wouldn't have said it.
We would like to all believe or think that he would have been an upgrade to Colt McCoy, but I'm not so inclined to think that is or should be a given.
He does probably have a higher upside, but I don't think that would have made a difference in our season as far as our record this past year.
Steve Smith made Jake Delhomme look pretty good for years too. Different set of circumstances, but we don't have a talent like him at this point.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323 |
see...reading comprehension is really a requirement when posting on the intertubes.
where i typed "frightening how their college careers are similar", you read "they are the same prospect because their numbers are similar and the system is similar".
griffins deep ball accuracy isn't gonna matter one iota for quite some time....least until he learns how to take a snap from under center, correct the horrible footwork, and deliver a ball past his first read (btw, who is that deep guy threat he's gonna throw to?) see...thats where the similar system actually matters. if you dont think so, then you really missed the lesson that was this years football woes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
So, why is it frightening that Griffin had good numerical production in college? I missed that lesson.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
Yes some very good points that I already agree with [bravo], but saying RG3 had one more good year (at baylor) is really irrelevant, don't you think?
Flynn was not afforded that opportunity, so imo that falls into the unknown category and can not be used for a case for comparison sake.
So then Colt is still an unknown.. because he has not been afforded the opportunity to sit and learn for a few years behind a potential future HOF quarterback in an established system with consistent coaching and with very good weapons..
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
Quote:
cause as i see it, college careers were similar...one good year.
I'm not going to get too deep into this.. but..
in Flynn's "one good year" he completed 56.3% of his passes for 2407 yards, 21 TDs and 11 INTs.. rushed for 215 yards (this includes sack yardage)
in RGIII's "one good year" he completed 72.4% of his passes for 4293 yards, 37 TDs and 6 INTs... rushed for 700 yards (also includes sack yardage)
There is a reason RGIII is considered a top 5 pick and Flynn was taken in the 7th round...
Case Keenum in just "one of his good years" completed 71% of his passes for 5,631 yards, 48 TDs and 5 INTs...He didn't rush for much yardage but scored 3 TD's rushing, but for his career had 23 Rushing TD's.
I would say a much better statistical year than Griffin and yet he did it in the same Briles Houston Offense. Yet he is considered a 7th round pick. Why? because it is Houston and the offense he is in. Which people are not taking into consideration when taking into account Griffin.
If Griffin and Briles were still at Houston(Briles was Coach and Griffin signed to play there), and if Griffin got a chance to play because Keenum was Briles recruit. I don't think he would be considered this top QB because most people understand the buyer beware with a Briles QB and the system he runs.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
cause as i see it, college careers were similar...one good year.
I'm not going to get too deep into this.. but..
in Flynn's "one good year" he completed 56.3% of his passes for 2407 yards, 21 TDs and 11 INTs.. rushed for 215 yards (this includes sack yardage)
in RGIII's "one good year" he completed 72.4% of his passes for 4293 yards, 37 TDs and 6 INTs... rushed for 700 yards (also includes sack yardage)
There is a reason RGIII is considered a top 5 pick and Flynn was taken in the 7th round...
Case Keenum in just "one of his good years" completed 71% of his passes for 5,631 yards, 48 TDs and 5 INTs...He didn't rush for much yardage but scored 3 TD's rushing, but for his career had 23 Rushing TD's.
I would say a much better statistical year than Griffin and yet he did it in the same Briles Houston Offense. Yet he is considered a 7th round pick. Why? because it is Houston and the offense he is in. Which people are not taking into consideration when taking into account Griffin.
If Griffin and Briles were still at Houston(Briles was Coach and Griffin signed to play there), and if Griffin got a chance to play because Keenum was Briles recruit. I don't think he would be considered this top QB because most people understand the buyer beware with a Briles QB and the system he runs.
He said Flynns and RGIIIs careers were similar in that they had one good year.. I was showing that they weren't all that similar. Had Matt Flynn put up the same numbers at any school other than LSU or Alabama, he would have won 5 games and probably would not have been drafted and he might be selling cars today.. so I don't really care what Case Keenums stats were.
So you think that Mel Kiper and Todd McShay and all of the NFL scouts are not taking all of this into consideration?
I would assume that NFL scouts would fall into that "most people" category who would understand that... so if you are right, he will fall dramatically in the draft. If he does not, then obviously the experts see something you don't.
So why didn't AJ McCarren declare then? He had a better year as a sophomore against those same SEC defenses than Flynn had as a senior.. better completion percentage, more yards, better TD:INT ratio... and he didn't lose to Kentucky and Arkansas. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,647 Likes: 5
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,647 Likes: 5 |
Quote:
If Griffin and Briles were still at Houston(Briles was Coach and Griffin signed to play there), and if Griffin got a chance to play because Keenum was Briles recruit. I don't think he would be considered this top QB because most people understand the buyer beware with a Briles QB and the system he runs.
Interesting point. I wonder if some people are so high on Griffin just because he's NOT McCoy.
There may be people who have more talent than you, but there's no excuse for anyone to work harder than you do.
-Derek Jeter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
Quote:
If Griffin and Briles were still at Houston(Briles was Coach and Griffin signed to play there), and if Griffin got a chance to play because Keenum was Briles recruit. I don't think he would be considered this top QB because most people understand the buyer beware with a Briles QB and the system he runs.
Interesting point. I wonder if some people are so high on Griffin just because he's NOT McCoy.
Bingo! And if it wasn't Griffin it would be Barkley and so on..
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
He said Flynns and RGIIIs careers were similar in that they had one good year.. I was showing that they weren't all that similar.
I understand but I thought you took the stats and said there is a reason why one is a 1st round QB and the other is a 7th...I must have mis understood. Honestly I think Kiper and McShay are tools. I think they can take any player and throw them on their board and it would create a buzz. If Kiper and McShay pumped up Keenum and posted his stats there are people on here that would drop 3 first rounders for him. I think Griffin is 1st more so 2nd round material. That is my opinion. I am not an expert but the guy works one side of the field in a one read offense, never took a snap from under center, Is in an offense that damn near everyone completes high 60's to 70 percent of the passes, doesn't understand how to read a defense, never had a playbook, and the offense caters to high percentage throws for a lot of yards and few interceptions. It's the style of offense. I absolutely don't think he is a first round pick. Based on what, his arm strength? First round picks just don't have that much stuff to work on and the numbers skew what peeople actually see. Luck is a first round QB, Griffin is hype. That's my opinion. He can be good, but so can Keenum. But they won't get the saame shot(and no I don't want Keenum anymore than I want Griffin). He needs a buyer beware asterisk by him. I think over time these drafts have become More about Hype which is why there is so much failure from certain 1st round QB's without taking a look at where they were and what they were asked to do and the consistency at which QB's put up those numbers in that offense. I guarantee that the next Baylor QB does just as well as Griffin.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
Quote:
Yes some very good points that I already agree with [bravo], but saying RG3 had one more good year (at baylor) is really irrelevant, don't you think?
Flynn was not afforded that opportunity, so imo that falls into the unknown category and can not be used for a case for comparison sake.
So then Colt is still an unknown.. because he has not been afforded the opportunity to sit and learn for a few years behind a potential future HOF quarterback in an established system with consistent coaching and with very good weapons..
Apples and oranges old boy.
I was making a reply in response to Nologo's statement, that Griffen had one more year in College as a 'starter.'
As if that has any bearing on how good a player was or was not (at that level), because he happen to not be the starter for more then a year.
They both had a separate set of circumstances and none smaller then what university they played for and the competition for their positions there.
To answer your question ... No! Colt is not at this point a finished product and I fully expect him improve his game, with that said, Colt does have a larger body of work at this level then does Flynn, even though mentally he is some years behind Flynn. True.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
There are multiple reasons why Griffin is a top 5 pick and Keenum is a late round QB
1) Griffin's arm is significantly stronger
2) Griffin can extend plays and make something out of nothing with his legs.
3) Griffin played in a significantly stronger conference
4) Griffin was a top player for a long time in one of the best conferences in college football
5) Griffin was able to read defenses, as proven by very low interception numbers
If Keenum had played like he did against top competition with a rocket arm and the ability to run for, on average, about 690 yards per year and extend plays from a broken pocket, then he'd be a top pick.
Instead, he played really well in a trash conference while making bad decisions and showing a weak rainbow arm.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
well, Griffin was the starter from day1 that he stepped on campus. He had much more than 1 more year compared to Flynn (though RGIII missed his sophomore campaign to injury).
and, it has been shown in the past that 1 year starters in college have a much lower success rate in the NFL. I can't recall the exact stats on it, but there was a distinct correlation (the original report I think was from SI but had wonderlic involved too and it's been since proven that the wonderlic does NOT have a correlation)
all that being said, I still think Griffin represents more risk than Flynn at this point. Flynn has proven his merit (earning the backup job in GB, having time to learn the WCO, being successful in both stints that he has had the opportunity to play-in), while Griffin is more of an unknown.
don't get me wrong, they both have HUGE questions and there's really know way to make a completely accurate decision at this point, but
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59 |
If you were equally sure on both (and i'm sure the FO wouldn't rate them as "equal" regardless of which one they like more) -
then you should pay $60M for Flynn (probably about $30M guaranteed) instead of $30M (all guaranteed) and a #4 overall pick (or more) for RG3.
Just my opinion.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 01/19/12 02:28 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
and, it has been shown in the past that 1 year starters in college have a much lower success rate in the NFL
There is probably some truth to that statistic (and also it could in part explain Flynn's drafted position), but it's probably a pretty week one to go on too as a basis for evaluation proposes. You can only judge anyone on the opportunities that they are presented with.
I always tell my children that's why you have to make the most out of each and everyone (opportunity) you are fortunate enough to be given a chance to prove yourself to someone or some team.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
If you were equally sure on both (and i'm sure the FO wouldn't rate them as "equal" regardless of which one they like more) -
then you should pay $60M for Flynn (probably about $30M guaranteed) instead of $30M (all guaranteed) and a #4 overall pick (or more) for RG3.
Just my opinion.
i'm thinking it'll be closer to 5yr/$50mil with $20mil in guarantees for Flynn (in lines with Kolb, Fitz, Cassell contracts)
and that's my general feeling right now which is why I prefer Flynn at the moment.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59 |
I agree - i was taking an pessimistic view of the cost for Flynn.
My point is that Flynn is much cheaper than RG3 - especially if you have to trade up.
If you think RG3 is much better, then that's immaterial, but otherwise...
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
My feeling on the Flynn situation is that if you're willing to live with Flynn's natural limitations then just stick with McCoy, coach him up better, call better plays, and give him better wideouts. Flynn is not going to come into Cleveland and throw for 6 TDs and 480 yards in a game just because he has experience in the WCO. Flynn was not a better prospect coming out of college than McCoy. Why is he better? He had time to learn his system and he had excellent talent around him. Flynn is not the type of guy who is going to elevate the players around him. Neither, as we seem to be finding out, is McCoy. I'm in the camp that if one of the two QBs falls to us at 4, you take him. The reason being he would be the best value and offer the most improvement to our team. If they're both gone, stick at 4 and take Blackmon. If he's gone as well, then it gets trickier.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
Quote:
If you were equally sure on both (and i'm sure the FO wouldn't rate them as "equal" regardless of which one they like more) -
then you should pay $60M for Flynn (probably about $30M guaranteed) instead of $30M (all guaranteed) and a #4 overall pick (or more) for RG3.
Just my opinion.
i'm thinking it'll be closer to 5yr/$50mil with $20mil in guarantees for Flynn (in lines with Kolb, Fitz, Cassell contracts)
and that's my general feeling right now which is why I prefer Flynn at the moment.
And still have all of our Draft picks to improve the other components of the team.
The question that comes to mind is how would signing Flynn have an effect on the top of the Draft board, if teams new they would not have to draft above us to get RG3?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Actually I think it would make our pick the one people were looking to to move up. You've still got WAS, MIA, and SEA looking for QBs. Justin Blackmon is gone at 4 in that scenario. Heckert like to trade down. you could pretty much sew up Luck, Kalil, and Blackmon as the top 3 picks, with STL deciding who Minny would draft IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Minny could go Claiborne if Kalil is gone. Their secondary is old, often-injured and was terrible.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
I would be really hoping for that in that situation. Heck, I might offer them a 6th rounder just to take Claiborne lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
My feeling on the Flynn situation is that if you're willing to live with Flynn's natural limitations then just stick with McCoy, coach him up better, call better plays, and give him better wideouts. Flynn is not going to come into Cleveland and throw for 6 TDs and 480 yards in a game just because he has experience in the WCO. Flynn was not a better prospect coming out of college than McCoy. Why is he better? He had time to learn his system and he had excellent talent around him.
i agree on why he is better. he had time to sit and learn the nuances, routes, and figure things out.
Quote:
Flynn is not the type of guy who is going to elevate the players around him. Neither, as we seem to be finding out, is McCoy.
you don't know that. he doesn't have the laser arm, but just knowing where to throw to, who to throw to, how to make line-adjustments, etc. can make everyone on the team better.
Quote:
I'm in the camp that if one of the two QBs falls to us at 4, you take him. The reason being he would be the best value and offer the most improvement to our team. If they're both gone, stick at 4 and take Blackmon. If he's gone as well, then it gets trickier.
I don't mind this scenario. But, we need to make the decision before we know who falls to us at #4. And, I think Flynn carries slightly less overall risk (when factoring in still having that draft pick, the fact he knows the WCO and has more proven in the NFL at this point).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
There are multiple reasons why Griffin is a top 5 pick and Keenum is a late round QB
1) Griffin's arm is significantly stronger
2) Griffin can extend plays and make something out of nothing with his legs.
3) Griffin played in a significantly stronger conference
4) Griffin was a top player for a long time in one of the best conferences in college football
5) Griffin was able to read defenses, as proven by very low interception numbers
If Keenum had played like he did against top competition with a rocket arm and the ability to run for, on average, about 690 yards per year and extend plays from a broken pocket, then he'd be a top pick.
Instead, he played really well in a trash conference while making bad decisions and showing a weak rainbow arm.
Look I don't give a crap about Griffin or Keenum but don't just say stuff to say it. How is reading a defense and low interception numbers a plus for Griffin but then you go on to say Keenum made bad decisions when he had less interceptions and more TD's? H e rushed for 690 yards because it was a one read option offense. If the first read wasn't there he tucked and ran or they ran an option play because of his athletic ability. If that's what you want out of your QB you have him here because McCoy can run fine, but that's not the idea and that's how QB's end up on the shelf. Competition? Take a look at what Keenum did against Penn State in the Bowl game compared to what Griffin did in his. Basically because Griffin has a strong arm and can run that's all there is. I'm done with this, it's pointless.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Quote:
Flynn is not the type of guy who is going to elevate the players around him. Neither, as we seem to be finding out, is McCoy.
you don't know that. he doesn't have the laser arm, but just knowing where to throw to, who to throw to, how to make line-adjustments, etc. can make everyone on the team better.
What I mean by that is that he doesn't have some innate attribute that makes poor players good or decent players great... super accuracy or arm strength that makes people who can't separate open. What you are describing is just being functional (not sure if that's funny or sad.) I think Colt could possibly be every bit as good as Flynn with the same time and preparation and we wouldn't have to lock $50 million into him right now. Flynn isn't going to do well unless we put talented receivers and TEs around him who also know how to run the offense... (not to mention RBs who know who to block.)
I really don't see signing Flynn as a significant upgrade. There will be some learning curve with Flynn coming here just as Colt still has a lot to learn. I'd rather they gave that $50 mil to keep DQ and sign a good receiver. Plus, signing Flynn takes you out of realistic QB at 4 talk.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
I really don't see signing Flynn as a significant upgrade.
then there's no reason to grab him to you and I can understand that. I see more attributes that do make him better because Colt isn't going to get that time to figure things out. best case for Colt is that he gets one more year to start (and likely with a rookie breathing down his neck).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,093 Likes: 3
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,093 Likes: 3 |
I totally agree with you. Matt Flynn looked good in spot start duty for the super bowl champions.O.K. does Matt Flynn throw 480 yds. and 6 TDs vs the Lions with our offense, doubtful. It seems Flynn is a less experienced slightly larger (1" and 10 lbs) version of McCoy. Alot more expensive and at the cost of a high draft pick possibly. No way let some other team take that gamble based on two games worth of experience.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
I understand but I thought you took the stats and said there is a reason why one is a 1st round QB and the other is a 7th...
The stats are only part of the reason one is a top 5 and the other is a 7th round.
Quote:
and the offense caters to high percentage throws for a lot of yards and few interceptions. It's the style of offense.
Ok, I've seen this about 1000 times now so I'm just going to ask the question... if there is an offense that you can plug any old QB into and complete a high percentage of your passes for a ton of yards and few interceptions... why doesn't everybody do it? Do the coachs at Stanford and Ohio State and LSU just prefer lower completion percentages for fewer yards and more interceptions? 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Look I don't give a crap about Griffin or Keenum but don't just say stuff to say it. How is reading a defense and low interception numbers a plus for Griffin but then you go on to say Keenum made bad decisions when he had less interceptions and more TD's?
Well, multiple reasons, really.
1) Griffin has constantly had a lower interception rate.
2) Griffin had 11 less touchdowns on 200 less passes. He also had 1 more INT, which could easily be chalked up to playing better defenses.
3) I've watched a lot of both of them, and Griffin can make the progression, whereas Keenum can be shut down if you take away his first option or blitz him. Keenum can be shaken easily.
Quote:
He rushed for 690 yards because it was a one read option offense. If the first read wasn't there he tucked and ran or they ran an option play because of his athletic ability. If that's what you want out of your QB you have him here because McCoy can run fine, but that's not the idea and that's how QB's end up on the shelf.
No matter how many yards he rushed for, he had the ability to take a broken pocket, extend the play, then make the play, unlike Colt.
What I'm saying is, Griffin can make something out of nothing, a real gamebreaker type talent.
Quote:
Competition? Take a look at what Keenum did against Penn State in the Bowl game compared to what Griffin did in his.
Yes, lets take a look.
Case Keenum threw for 532 yards, 3 TD's and 0 INTS
Robert Griffin threw for 295 yards, 1 TD and 0 INTS
Now looking at the bare bone stats, you'd say that Keenum easily had the better game.
However, Keenum nearly threw 70 passes whereas Griffin threw 32 passes. Griffin had a higher completion percentage, higher average per completion, and his team scored 67 friggin points because of the running game of the whole team andIWashington being scared to death of Griffin.
Oh, and Griffin faced some of the best pass rushes in the NCAA, including Texas A&M who had the best pass rush in the nation, Oklahoma was tied for 8th in sacks, and Oklahoma State who was 30th. Keenum's hardest defense as far as pass rush was Southern Mississippi who was tied for 22nd, and Keenum got destroyed.
If we went with passes defended, Griffin went up against the best PD team in the NCAA in Texas who lead the nation. Keenum, once again, was Southern Miss. INT, Griffin once again faced the hardest INT team in the Nation with Oklahoma State. Granted, Keenum did face some tough INT teams.
My point is, Griffin faced some significantly harder teams defensively, and Keenum didn't. Keenum put up great stats in a 2 team league. Griffin did his in the Big 12 against big time competition.
Quote:
Basically because Griffin has a strong arm and can run that's all there is. I'm done with this, it's pointless.
Griffin has a strong arm, can run, can hit receivers in stride, can fit the ball in NFL windows, can keep broken plays alive, can destroy a pass rush with quick decisions, and can do all of that against some of the best competition in the NCAA.
I wish you were really done, because you are holding a grudge against the guy for no reason other than you apparently do not like him and are spouting off false facts and judgments based upon stereotypes.
I'm not sure you have even watched more than 1 game of Robert Griffin.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
I guess I just don't think Colt McCoy would have thrown for 480yds and 6TDs for the Packers if you plugged him in week17 there.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,104 Likes: 1
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,104 Likes: 1 |
Im holding out on my judgement of RG3 until after the combine and such. It's still extremely early to be projecting where he might go. Luck is the only certain as far as I'm concerned. Look at last year. At this time Fairly and Bowers were being discussed as the top picks and Cam Newton was projected as a late first rounder. We still have plenty of scouting to go.
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59 |
Quote:
Im holding out on my judgement of RG3 until after the combine and such. It's still extremely early to be projecting where he might go. Luck is the only certain as far as I'm concerned. Look at last year. At this time Fairly and Bowers were being discussed as the top picks and Cam Newton was projected as a late first rounder. We still have plenty of scouting to go.
Yes and no:
First off, I think the teams are mostly done with scouting - most GMs will tell you that their Big Boards don't move very much after the large scouting meetings that are held around the end of January. People get pushed around a little bit by the combine, and by interviews - but they've watched all the tape already, so things are pretty set.
On the other hand, the media big board does move a lot - for the following reasons:
1.) Combine - combine numbers are a lot bigger in the media than they are for teams (or else, you could say teams have a better idea what a players numbers will look like than the media).
2.) Info from inside different teams - over time, small leaks and inferences from team insiders get out to the media, which then switches it's own "consensus" big board to compensate for what teams were already thinking back in January.
The first phase happens between now and the end of February. The 2nd phase happens more and more as we get closer to the draft. It's the second part that someone like Mel Kiper is very good at (he has the best connections to team insiders) - and it shows in his final mock draft, which is usually among the most accurate.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398 Likes: 280 |
Quote:
I guess I just don't think Colt McCoy would have thrown for 480yds and 6TDs for the Packers if you plugged him in week17 there.
Probably not... and I'll all but guarantee you that if the Packers played the Lions 10 more times that Matt Flynn couldn't duplicate those numbers either.
But I will say this, if Colt had come into the league with the Patriots, sat behind Tom Brady for 3 years with no pressure, learning the system, playing in a consistent scheme... then been asked to start, he would have looked a heck of a lot better than he has looked here since being thrown to the wolves.
The Browns don't just need to find a franchise QB... they need to find a guy who is capable of looking a lot like a franchise QB from day 1 because he's never going to get a year or two to sit and learn. I have just accepted that as a fact. That is the single biggest argument that I can find for signing Matt Flynn...
I will ask this though, what if we sign Flynn or draft RGIII and start him and we still score 14 ppg and go 5-11?
I think it has a lot to do with the situation because it has worked both ways.. some star QBs like both Mannings, Roethlisberger, Aikman, Elway, Marino either started the first season or became the starter early in year one... others like Montana, Brees, Rivers, Rodgers, Favre, Brady had a year or more to sit... who knows how much that year of sitting allowed them to grow and improve and impacted their career..
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,428 Likes: 15
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,428 Likes: 15 |
.. " I'm done with this, it's pointless.. " ... PROMISE ? ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
.. " I'm done with this, it's pointless.. "
... PROMISE ? ...
With that one!  I make too much sense for you!
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,840 Likes: 948
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,840 Likes: 948 |
Quote:
and the offense caters to high percentage throws for a lot of yards and few interceptions. It's the style of offense.
Quote:
Ok, I've seen this about 1000 times now so I'm just going to ask the question... if there is an offense that you can plug any old QB into and complete a high percentage of your passes for a ton of yards and few interceptions... why doesn't everybody do it? Do the coachs at Stanford and Ohio State and LSU just prefer lower completion percentages for fewer yards and more interceptions?
Thank you. 
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
I really think it helps our chances of getting Luck. The old GM was pretty much set on going Luck. The new GM Grigson is Great friends with Heckert. I think he wants more picks and to start rebuilding this aging franchise.
You have the Colts roster including Peyton Manning. The Browns offer you their #4, #22 and #38 for Andrew Luck. That means you have 4 picks in the top 40. You could add your future QB, DE, and Receiver ad fill the current need at corner. Those 3 picks are trade chart value and teams arent going to stay to far from that chart.
If we do that then we really need to hit some home runs in free agency and in the mid rounds of the draft. I gotta say it makes alot of sense for both teams.
Heres the question's I would ask myself. (best Pluto voice)
Why wouldnt the Browns keep those picks and add "Their future QB, DE and Receiver" instead of adding just 1 future QB? If it works for Indy why wouldnt it work for the Browns who have more needs?
Thats why im not in the trade up camp we can do more to help this team by not trading up.
Also as someone posted we could trade down get a 1st next year maybe even 2 under the right situation and trading down twice. Then be in prime position to do what ever we want in next year draft as well
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Pluto's Talkin' about the Browns'
offensive line, the No. 4 draft
pick
|
|
