View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently August 30th, 2014, 12:12 am



Reply to topic  [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Ramblings about drafting Stafford 
Author Message
Varsity Captain

Joined: March 7th, 2007, 2:59 pm
Posts: 324
Post 
Honolulu_Blue wrote:
And while I believe starts are important, Sanchez on tape looks way better than Stafford. Seems the rest of the league has come to that conclusion as well.And if they really want a guy with a strong arm, they already have Culpepper. At least that guy got it done before.

I also agree that the best team building philosophy is to build the team up first to put a QB in a position to succeed. And what really makes this incomprehensible, is the fact that he's an early entry QB. If we were taking a senior with the starts to go with it, you just might be able to play him early. But we're taking someone to be the highest paid on the team to take it easy on the bench and just watch. It'd be way more prudent to wait to draft next year, a 3 year starter who is a senior or RS jr, because you may be able to play them as rookies ala Ryan, Flacco, Roethlisberger.

If we go with Curry, then he's the centerpiece for an attacking aggressive defense. What would you rather have? I know the results speak for themselves. And I don't need to reiterate every single positive point that pops up daily why Curry should be the pick.



First off its hard to believe that most of the nfl has come to the conclusion that Sanchez is the better qb. the only other teams at the top of the draft that ive heard that are remotely interested are the browns and seahawks, both pretty clear smokescreens at this point in the draft. Only around maybe 10 does sanchez start to make sense for teams. And Culpepper? He got it done what, 4 years and two knees ago. Remember that he sat on the sidelines for a year or so and only a team that was 0-16 would take a shot on him. Will he be better this year, yes. But he is a stop gap at best.

Stafford was a 3 year starter in SEC with less talent and many more starts then Sanchez. Even if Stafford stayed for his senior season he would be the number 1 qb next year. McCoy, Bradford, and Tebow all come from spread systems (why put a spread QB into a team that wants to run first anyway?) and have much greater questions then Stafford. McCoy and Tebow are both projects at best, and Bradford lacks the arm strength of Stafford and is less athletic. All came from programs with more talent then Stafford any way.

And finally the Curry pick. It only makes sense if the Lions trade one Sims or Peterson, neither of which is very likely to happen anytime soon. So you would love to spend 45 mill on a player that will have to CHANGE positions at the next level without adequate DT play to keep opposing Olines off the linebackers (see Sims this year). A attacking, aggressive defense would be amazing, but honestly MLB is fairly low on the priority list after DT, DE, and a true number 1 at CB. Taking a converted MLB at one just doesnt make a ton of sense. And yes I understand that you could grab a DT at 20 or later, but if all you want is a thumper then Rey Malaugua is just as viable, and much cheaper.


April 23rd, 2009, 5:34 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2631
Post 
Quote:
You don't find really good defensive players or OL floating around in free agency unless they are at the end of their ropes. That's why the team let them go in the first place. That's why early picks of these types of players are paramount.


Laughable.

Joey Porter. Jared Allen. Jason Peters. Simeon Rice. Warren Sapp. Alan Faneca. Darren Sharper. All defensive/offensive line guys let go or traded in the prime of their careers. And those are just the recent ones I can think of off the top of my head. There are dozens more.

Quote:
Kurt Warner, UDFA to Rams, FA to Cardinals
Kerry Collins FA to Titans
Matt Cassell trade to Chiefs
Jay Cutler trade to Bears
Drew Brees FA to Saints
Matt Schaub trade to Texans
Eli Manning draft day trade to Giants
Chad Pennington FA to Dolphins
Phillip Rivers draft day trade to Chargers


Warner was thought to be washed up.
Collins: see above.
Cassell is an unknown.
Schaub see above (or was at the time).
Manning and Rivers were traded for eachother and don't count.
Pennington is mediocre at best.
Drew Brees was coming off a serious injury and was a gamble at the time. (if you remember, Miami was debating on going with him or Culpepper and made the wrong decision)

Cutler is the only QB on your list that was let go or traded in his prime when he was a known commodity. And it was a once in a lifetime occurrence.


April 23rd, 2009, 5:42 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran
User avatar

Joined: September 15th, 2004, 6:02 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post 
Georgia was a preseason no. 1 team. Stafford underachieved badly. He sucks as a number one prospect. Like Sanchez, he only makes sense mid to late first round. It's just our luck that the cream of the crop for QB's this year are guys with more question marks than usual.

Peterson will be 31. We have no middle linebacker. Why is there any reason not to take him? There isn't. Stop fabricating baseless reasons not to. None exist.

_________________
Image
Lion http://www.suh93.com


April 23rd, 2009, 5:42 pm
Profile WWW
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2745
Post Re: Ramblings about drafting Stafford
Quote:
I understand what you're saying, but the main problem with your line of reasoning is that finding a franchise QB after the team already has some success is very hard to do. Pitt got Big Ben after a terrible year so they had a relatively high draft pick. Flacco is still an unknown. It's not as simple as just picking a franchise QB anywhere. They are hard to come by. The Bears have been trying to find one for years. They may finally have one now. The Bucs, Ravens, Jags, Titans...all solid teams with good D that have been hoping for a franchise QB for a long time.

Now, I'll take their success over the Lions failure any day. I'm just saying that finding a franchise QB is hard, and if you think you have a shot at him now, you take him. The bottom line to me is that if Stafford turns out to be a solid QB, I have no problem if he sits for a year, or even 2. Long term success is how I measure things. Not what a player can do next year.


This is constantly brought up about these teams looking for a long time, but just look at the history...

Vikings haven't drafted a QB in the first round since 99 when they took Culpepper. If it wasn't for his injury that set him back for the last 4 years, would they have needed to look? They've had 4 years to draft one early, but instead tried to rely on journeymen or rely on Jackson who was a late 2nd rounder.

Jags thought they were set with 2003 when they drafted Leftwich. They decided Garrard was their man and released Leftwich instead of drafting early.

The Buccaneers last first round pick on QB was 1994 with Trent Dilfer. They tried again 5 years later with Shaun King in the 2nd in 1999. 10 years since they've tried again.

Ravens tried Kyle Boller in 2003, and then went with end of his line, McNair before drafting Flacco last year.

Titans had McNair who they selected first in 1995, and thought they had a prospect in Young in 2006. The previous was 1986. Notice the 10 year trend?

Bears went with Grossman in 2003, after a failure with Cade McNown in 1999.

Only point i'm trying to make is those teams that have been looking forever, haven't really been putting much effort into going after a QB they think can help them.

Even picking QB's in later rounds to try to develop, the list is lacking.

Vikings - Jackson in 2nd round in 2007, Tyler Thigpen who would have been better than either QB on the field last year in 2006, and John David Booty last year in 2008 that will probably pan out in a few years.

Jacksonville hasn't tried to develop anyone since they drafted Leftwich. Garrard was taken in the 4th the previous year in 2002.

Tampa has picked 4 all in 3-6th round over the years, with only Chris Simms being starter material. Gruden's love for veterans shipped Simms out of town after his injury, and now he might be the starter in Denver.

Tennessee only drafted Kevin Daft in the 5th round in 1999. Kevin who? No other QB's between McNair and Young.

The Bears got Orton and Krenzel in late round picks. Orton actually led them to a Division title in 2005, albiet with the worst rating in the league.

Again, they're looking so hard, yet haven't tried very hard to trade up or trade for someone viable. Meanwhile the Lions drafted Stanton 2 years ago in the 2nd, and is a big question mark. Orlovsky had his chance last year and we didn't try to resign.

And I'm not dead set against Stafford, but I'm definitely thinking about the future. A QB at the wrong time and place doesn't just waste a year, it sets back teams for multiple years because of the salary demands of a QB on the salary cap. A QB with a 70million dollar contract, won't be easy to just forget. That's why even the experts say, a bust at the QB position sets back your team 5 years. Its not like you couldn't draft another one, but the salary cap limits what you can do at other positions to help them.

If they feel Stafford is a sure thing, then by all means pick him. If there's any doubt by the coaches or front office, then you have to pass on him and pick someone later to develop.


April 23rd, 2009, 5:42 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran
User avatar

Joined: September 15th, 2004, 6:02 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post 
Blueskies wrote:
Quote:
You don't find really good defensive players or OL floating around in free agency unless they are at the end of their ropes. That's why the team let them go in the first place. That's why early picks of these types of players are paramount.


Laughable.

Joey Porter. Jared Allen. Jason Peters. Simeon Rice. Warren Sapp. Alan Faneca. Darren Sharper. All defensive/offensive line guys let go or traded in the prime of their careers. And those are just the recent ones I can think of off the top of my head. There are dozens more.

Quote:
Kurt Warner, UDFA to Rams, FA to Cardinals
Kerry Collins FA to Titans
Matt Cassell trade to Chiefs
Jay Cutler trade to Bears
Drew Brees FA to Saints
Matt Schaub trade to Texans
Eli Manning draft day trade to Giants
Chad Pennington FA to Dolphins
Phillip Rivers draft day trade to Chargers


Warner was thought to be washed up.
Collins: see above.
Cassell is an unknown.
Schaub see above (or was at the time).
Manning and Rivers were traded for eachother and don't count.
Pennington is mediocre at best.
Drew Brees was coming off a serious injury and was a gamble at the time. (if you remember, Miami was debating on going with him or Culpepper and made the wrong decision)

Cutler is the only QB on your list that was let go or traded in his prime when he was a known commodity. And it was a once in a lifetime occurrence.


You're missing the point like you always seem to do. Look at the big picture. These teams are successfull. Maybe you've pigeon-holed yourself into finding the next Peyton Manning, which doesn't have a very large margin for error. And believe me, Stafford will unlikely fit that bill. Don't paint those moves to be any more gambles than taking an overrated underdeveloped prospect like Stafford no. 1. You like to subject these arguments to double standards. Bottom line, is we want the team successful. And drafting an overrated underdeveloped prospect onto a team where he will be set up for failure is poor strategy.

_________________
Image
Lion http://www.suh93.com


April 23rd, 2009, 5:50 pm
Profile WWW
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2745
Post Re: Ramblings about drafting Stafford
Blueskies wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
lionsfanak wrote:
The Lions would do the team a great disservice by drafting Stafford for a number of reasons:

1. This team went 0-16. Why draft a player that can't come in and make an immediat impact? Every "expert" says that he''ll have to sit for a year or so. They can't afford to have another draft where the first 3 rounds don't produce starters, let alone the first overall pick not being an immediate starter.
2. Complain about the offense and the need for a quarterback all they want, the pundits also state the obvious. They had the worse defense in the league last year!!!!
3. They don't have the offensive line in place yet that can help a young quarterback.
4. It's too easy to miss on a quarterback. History tells us that.

I'm tired of the hyprocracy of all of the experts too. "This team did it right, they built from the inside out, they built their defense through the draft, they waited until the offense was ready for a young quarterback". These rules seem to apply to every successful organization but not the Lions. "They have to take a quarterback early". Why? So you can rip them later about how they squandered another first round pick? Why is it right for other teams to build from the inside out? Why is it right for other teams to build their defense through the draft?


I don't want to hear any more about how the Lions need to draft the "face of the franchise". Ray Lewis, Brian Urlacher, Joey Porter/Jerome Bettis, Derrick Brooks, all the faces of their respective successful franchises, all winning teams at the time.

Detroit is not a place where they would shun a defensive player being the face of the franchise, they would embrace it. I'll take my chances with a mother of a defense and a so-so offense that has a crusty old vet for a quarterback that can read a defense and won't give the game away for me over a high profile quarterback that gets shelled every time he drops back to pass. I've seen the Joey Harrington experiment play out before. This is a team that has a long history of bad picks at quarterback. Solidify the rest of the offense before drafting a quarterback, build a rock solid defense and go out and be a playoff contender before trying to put a kid behind that line.

Just a few thoughts.

If Stafford becomes a great QB, the bolded part about having to sit for a year is not a valid argument in my opinion. Again, IF he becomes a great QB. Think about it. Jump ahead 3 years from now. If Stafford becomes a great QB, then the Lions will have their QB locked up for years to come and will be well on their way to building a solid team. If he sucks, it doesn't matter if he plays now or next year.

I personally would much rather sacrifice short term success for long term success. I'm not saying that Stafford is or isn't going to be good. I don't know what he'll be. But saying that we need someone to step in now is wrong in my opinion. What we need is someone who is going to be good for the next 5-10 years.


Stafford can become a great QB, but not until the team that he plays for allows him to develop, and is capable of building the team around him to be such that they aren't dependent on him to win games. Big Ben fell into a PERFECT situation in Pittsburgh, because they've NEVER put the ball into his hands and said, "it's up to you to win the game." at the onset of that game. Sure, he's had game winning drives that have won games, like in the Super Bowl. But he's never felt the pressure that he will have to be the one to pull it out if it is close at the end, at the beginning of the game. He had a stellar defense, he had a solid running game to rely on until he got his opportunities to make his mark. Same thing happened last season for both Flacco and Ryan. It wasn't put on them to keep the team in the game and win it.

The Lions have so much building to do, and they need those pieces to get it done. If they draft Stafford and their other picks don't pan out, then the result is that Stafford has no shot of working out either. Get the parts now, see how they do. Then, once you have them in place, bring in your fancy new toy (franchise QB), get a stop gap vet QB (if one isn't already in place) and then when the kid is given his chance, it will be on much better terms than if he is forced into service (ala Joe Flacco) due to injury or illness.


The fallacy here is that you're equating the first pick with "building up the team".

The first pick is only one pick. Just one guy. Let's not make it out to be more than it is.

In order for the FO to "build this team up" they're going to have to hit on many picks, both this year and the next two or three.

Let's assume they take Stafford. Then they sit him for a year. They go defense/offensive line with picks 20, 33, 3a, and 3b. In the 2010 draft they use their first, second, and third rounds picks on more defensive players/offensive lineman. Then Stafford starts the 2010 season with a "built team" comprised of the 7 new offensive lineman/defensive players you brought in with picks other than the #1 pick.

Remember, the Lions have a lot of good picks this year, and Stafford doesn't have to play right away. There is no reason to say that the team cannot be "built up" by the time he starts. Further, there is no reason to say you can't build a team up without drafting Aaron Curry.

I think most people are overvaluing the number one pick. The player selected will have a huge impact, but he won't make or break the franchise.


But thats the point Blueskies... its not just one guy. The difference between QB and any other position at #1 is large enough that its another player's salary in free agency on the salary cap. Its was a year and 20 million dollars or 10 million for the extra year on Matt Ryan's contract compared to long. 10 million dollars, even if you broke it down to 2 million per year in cap space could get you 1 or 2 players in free agency, or multiple veterans at the vet minimum if they wanted to get older players as stop gaps, sort of how the Patriots retool every season.


April 23rd, 2009, 5:50 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran
User avatar

Joined: September 15th, 2004, 6:02 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post 
Quote:
Manning and Rivers were traded for eachother and don't count.


Sure it counts. It just shows you can move around in the draft to target your QB of choice.

Stop discounting facts that don't suit you. Why wouldn't the Lions be able to do the same? It's not like it hasn't been done before.

_________________
Image
Lion http://www.suh93.com


April 23rd, 2009, 5:55 pm
Profile WWW
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2745
Post 
Quote:
Cassell is an unknown.
Schaub see above (or was at the time).


Only put the Cassell line there because the line relates to Shaub. Shaub was not an unknown. He filled in great for Vick at times, and was very accurate over his 3 years in Atlanta. The only reason Schaub was released was because of the big contract they signed with Vick. They couldn't afford Schaub and they knew it, so they got 2 2nd rounders in exchange. Atlanta of course was kicking themselves when just weeks later, the news about the dog fighting started showing up, and led to Vick being suspended.


April 23rd, 2009, 6:21 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2631
Post 
Quote:
You like to subject these arguments to double standards.


No double standard because the situations are not equal in any way, shape or form.

Simeon Rice leaving Arizona in FA to sign with Tampa Bay and lead the league in sacks is not in any way equatable with old man Kerry Collins going to the Titans and have a mediocre season.

Kurt Warner leaving STL after injury for the Giants only to play bad is not the same as reigning top guard in the league Alan Faneca leaving the Steelers to join the Jets.

You can find higher quality defensive players or offensive lineman in FA more often than QBs. If you must trade for them, they come cheaper: Jared Allen was traded for much less than Cutler, even though Allen is a much better defensive end than Cutler is QB.


Quote:
Sure it counts. It just shows you can move around in the draft to target your QB of choice.

Stop discounting facts that don't suit you. Why wouldn't the Lions be able to do the same? It's not like it hasn't been done before.


They traded one unknown potential franchise QB for another unknown potential franchise QB. If the Lions don't have one in the first place, how are they supposed to trade one for another? Using Rivers/Manning is a dumb argument and it doesn't apply. It has nothing to do with me wanting to ignore it. It is irrelevant.

Quote:
Shaub was not an unknown.


Schaub was a backup. How many games did he start? He was an unknown.


April 23rd, 2009, 6:42 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2297
Post 
As I've said before I don't like any of these guys as #1 picks not Curry, Stafford, Monroe, Smith, etc... But of course the Lions pick this year to be that team. My heart says Curry, my gut, says, Smith, but my head says take the gamble on Stafford. I think a lot of people even though they don't want to say it are falling into the idea that if the Dolphins and Falcons can turn it around in one year why can't the Lions? Those teams were much better off overall as far as overall talent than the Lions are going into this season. Also let's see them do it again, because I'd rather have a team that is a perennial winner than a roller coaster team. I want a team that when they have a bad season it's 6-10 or 7-9 not 3-13 or worse.

Anyways the Lions are in a good spot to take this gamble despite the cap hit if he does bust. They can't get any worse unless the league expands the season and they have what looks like a born again Culpepper as a safety net. Palmer sat for a year and that worked out pretty good for him and the Bengals. So Stafford gets paid to sit for a year or more, does it suck? You bet, but if he pans out "yahtzee." In that time build the defense through this year and next year's draft as well as FA and either get a LT to groom this year or get a Ciron Black or Russell Okung next year. Even id he doesn't pan out they take the cap hit and move on while Culpepper holds down the fort for three or four years. I don't like the gamble but now might be the best time to do it, when the expectations are low.

They have so many holes Curry isn't turning them around this season and neither is Smith. All Curry is going to do is give us that warm fuzzy feeling if he makes some big plays. This isn’t a guarantee, especially with a less than stellar DL keeping blockers off of him. Look at the seasons Lewis and Urlacher had when they had less talent playing in front of them. Let's not forget just because we all love Curry and he's listed as the safest pick doesn't mean he can't fizzle in the league (1996 Kevin Hardy LB #2 pick).

The 1st round picks are your studs, the guys that take a team to that next level they aren't the building blocks unless they are DL or LT. The team comes from the rest of the draft and hitting on a few surprises and at least adding depth. That is where the Lions were hurt under Mil len. It wasn't that he was a complete boob when it came to the first round, even though he was. It's that not only could he not draft players in the later rounds to help the Lions once they left the Lions teams either didn't want them or for the most part weren't even worthy of contributing anywhere in the NFL.

Every team has whiffs in the 1st round even the mighty Patriots have had their fair share this decade, but the teams that can build through the later rounds are the ones that find they are contending almost every year. I believe the Giants in '07 had eight drat picks that year contribute to their Super Bowl. Stafford might not be the right pick and could cost them by eating up cap space but it's the majority of the other picks this year and next that are going to decide the future of the Lions. It's not Curry, Stafford, or Smith as much as everybody wants to say that #1 pick is what is going to make or break them.

I think too many people want that instant gratification and that's what Millen was looking for instead of building a team. I'll feel the same if it's Curry, Stafford, or Smith and that's that I won't expect much from the Lions at all this season. Smith is going to need time and a LG, Curry a better DL, and Stafford an OL and time to develop. There is no magic pill, snake oil, or super player that will raise the Lions to contender instead of door mat. The only answer is time, hard work, and dedication from the staff, current players, and future players.


April 23rd, 2009, 6:49 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2631
Post 
Quote:
Every team has whiffs in the 1st round even the mighty Patriots have had their fair share this decade, but the teams that can build through the later rounds are the ones that find they are contending almost every year. I believe the Giants in '07 had eight drat picks that year contribute to their Super Bowl. Stafford might not be the right pick and could cost them by eating up cap space but it's the majority of the other picks this year and next that are going to decide the future of the Lions. It's not Curry, Stafford, or Smith as much as everybody wants to say that #1 pick is what is going to make or break them.


This.


April 23rd, 2009, 6:58 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran
User avatar

Joined: September 15th, 2004, 6:02 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post 
Blueskies wrote:
Quote:
You like to subject these arguments to double standards.


No double standard because the situations are not equal in any way, shape or form.

Simeon Rice leaving Arizona in FA to sign with Tampa Bay and lead the league in sacks is not in any way equatable with old man Kerry Collins going to the Titans and have a mediocre season.

Kurt Warner leaving STL after injury for the Giants only to play bad is not the same as reigning top guard in the league Alan Faneca leaving the Steelers to join the Jets.

You can find higher quality defensive players or offensive lineman in FA more often than QBs. If you must trade for them, they come cheaper: Jared Allen was traded for much less than Cutler, even though Allen is a much better defensive end than Cutler is QB.


Quote:
Sure it counts. It just shows you can move around in the draft to target your QB of choice.

Stop discounting facts that don't suit you. Why wouldn't the Lions be able to do the same? It's not like it hasn't been done before.


They traded one unknown potential franchise QB for another unknown potential franchise QB. If the Lions don't have one in the first place, how are they supposed to trade one for another? Using Rivers/Manning is a dumb argument and it doesn't apply. It has nothing to do with me wanting to ignore it. It is irrelevant.

Quote:
Shaub was not an unknown.


Schaub was a backup. How many games did he start? He was an unknown.


Dude do you even know what your stance is? What are you arguing about?

The double standard I'm talking about is regarding QB's. You discredit my list of QB's acquired onto teams who thereafter where successful as being washed up, unknown, risks, gambles therefore, by your argument, not valid ways to become a successful team. How the heck can you turn around and make like taking one of the riskiest QB prospects no. 1 sound and viable? You conveniently ignore it's inherent risks. Therefore your double standard.

Just because those teams didn't draft a first overall quarterback you are willing to complete discount their success as a franchise? For a QB to have a mediocre season, it means nothing that they had the best regular season record? For a quarterback to be washed up, it means nothing that he led his team to the Superbowl? My goodness take off the blinders. There are different ways of gaining success in the league.

The point that you can move around in the draft to get your QB is also valid. I don't know what law or rule you abide by that says the Lions can't move around in the draft to target a QB.

Again what the heck is your stance? The only thing I can figure out is you want the next Peyton Manning. Because if you are willing to discount a quarter of the leagues success because they didn't do it the Peyton Manning way, I don't know what the heck your point is. You don't do a very good job of making it clear.

It's getting pointless to talk to you. Your credibility has been shot with every ridiculous argument you make. And you get lost in these trivial details that don't even apply. And you for some magical reason, facts that are contrary to your arguments don't apply.

We are finished here.

_________________
Image
Lion http://www.suh93.com


April 23rd, 2009, 7:07 pm
Profile WWW
Junior Varsity

Joined: March 26th, 2006, 11:09 am
Posts: 165
Post 
Stafford has every bit of a chance to be Peyton Manning as Petyton Manning did at the time he was drafted. If you remember, the colts SUCKED. And then they went 1-15 his first year. Ryan Leaf was supposed to be the better QB, and everyone hammered the Colts for passing on him for Manning, who, like Stafford, couldn't win the big game in college. I am not advocating taking Stafford, I want Curry, but realisticly either pick will be a solid pick at #1


April 23rd, 2009, 7:42 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2745
Post 
Comparing Stafford to Peyton is the most ridiculous comparison I've ever heard. Go look up their collegiate accolades and they're not even in the same round if they were both in the same draft, let alone the same discussion. Yes, Peyton's knock was because of his lack of beating Florida, and Ryan had been a Heisman Candidate that year, so was fresh on people's minds.

Peyton thru for 300+ 18 times. Stafford = 3. For someone with the "huge arm" where was he throwing? Stafford might be the "best" in this class, but I think its a big mistake for anyone to consider him an option. The more and more I go back over his accomplishments, the more disappointed I get.


April 23rd, 2009, 8:24 pm
Profile
#1 Overall Pick

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 10:34 am
Posts: 1427
Post 
Quote:
Simeon Rice leaving Arizona in FA to sign with Tampa Bay and lead the league in sacks is not in any way equatable with old man Kerry Collins going to the Titans and have a mediocre season.

Kurt Warner leaving STL after injury for the Giants only to play bad is not the same as reigning top guard in the league Alan Faneca leaving the Steelers to join the Jets.


A funny part about using these 2 veteran QBs as your example is that BOTH of them have been available more than 1 time..... and teams like the Lions have been so busy chasing a "golden goose" or the "next Peyton Manning" with a top pick that they choose not to sign them as UFAs.


What is more HILARIOUS is that you conveniently overlooked the fact that Kerry Collins led the Giants to a Super Bowl in his PRIME after he was cut by Carolina. Then.... he was given up on again by all of the "smart" teams like the Lions, and he still is better than any QB we have had in decades.

ALSO.........

Kurt Warner was indeed looking like he had lost something when Arizona grabbed him for next to nothing.

But did you already forget that he was an UFA 2 months ago???

Any team that was missing only a QB could have become an instant Super Bowl contender.



Quote:
Jared Allen was traded for much less than Cutler, even though Allen is a much better defensive end than Cutler is QB.


Cutler has played 3 seasons.... made 1 Pro-Bowl.
Allen had played 4 season when traded..... made 1 Pro-Bowl.


Allen has played 5 years at a position that is capable of having an immediate impact..... while Cutler has started less than 2.5 seasons.

Yeah........ seems like a good comparison.

Oh.....

And don't forget that Allen's price suffered due to being a 2-time offender in the NFL substance abuse program, and faced a 1 year suspension if he had made another infraction.

HOWEVER.....

Again, the main point is NOT that a DE is as valuable as a QB.

NOBODY is comparing WORTH.... it is about AVAILABILITY.

Cutler himself was landed by the Broncos when they traded up from #29 all the way to #11 to draft him in 2006. It didn't cost the Broncos a 1st round pick to do it either!!!


April 23rd, 2009, 9:11 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 63 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.