Thoner7 Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 Those who hate Locker because his numbers suck and accuracy can NEVER be improved. Right? Don't be afraid to vote now. I hate Jake Locker (not as a man, he’s probably a really nice guy, but as a potential Bills draft selection) because I watched the games and saw how much he sucked. I have no idea what his stats are and honestly don’t care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 So who is mystery man F? I don't feel like looking it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotton Fitzsimmons Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I hate Jake Locker (not as a man, he’s probably a really nice guy, but as a potential Bills draft selection) because I watched the games and saw how much he sucked. I have no idea what his stats are and honestly don’t care. I completely agree. Washington was actually better when Locker was out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I voted e however c intrigued me as it seemed he improved steadily before getting hurt (I assume) senior year. I know you feel this thread is proving some point but I hope its only that 3 stats do not a qb make. There is no context to these stats not what type of offense, skill of competition, skill of teammates, nothing to aid these stats. Hopefully (and it pains me that I know I'm wrong) ppl are basing their decisions of off these things as well as having watched the players play not just 3 stats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think we are all dumber for reading this thread. Thanks for all the hard work OP I couldn't agree more. The collective IQ on this board took a big hit today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddenboy Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 We also need wins and losses. Dont tell me that "oh if his team sucks his wins will be lower." That's true, but since you didnt say what conference they played in, what offense they ran, how many different co-ordinators they had, etc., you can at least add in W/L record. Right now, give me E or F. I like people trending upward. It shows learning and maturation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 So who is mystery man F? I don't feel like looking it up. I believe the original poster already revealed that QB F is Brady Quinn, and that some of the other QB's were Kelly, Marino, and Montana. We are all fools!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreReed83 Posted April 10, 2011 Author Share Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) QB_A - DAN MARINO QB_B - JOE MONTANA QB_C - JIM KELLY QB_D - RYAN LEAF QB_E - JAMARCUS RUSSELL QB_F - BRADY QUINN QB_G - BRETT FAVRE According to some of you, Dan Marino, Joe Montana, and Jim Kelly would've had HORRIBLE careers because they sucked and were inaccurate in college, while Brady Quinn, Leaf and Russell would've torn it up because they were accurate. I guess Cam Newton WILL be better than Joe Montana and Dan Marino since his college numbers were better. We also need wins and losses. Dont tell me that "oh if his team sucks his wins will be lower." That's true, but since you didnt say what conference they played in, what offense they ran, how many different co-ordinators they had, etc., you can at least add in W/L record. Right now, give me E or F. I like people trending upward. It shows learning and maturation. As far as I can remember, Jamarcus Russell also put up prolific numbers in the SEC and won many games including a national championship as well and had a great record in college. I couldn't agree more. The collective IQ on this board took a big hit today. Why? Because I've educated all the Newton supporters that his numbers and accomplishments are BS? Your welcome for the education. I hate Jake Locker (not as a man, he’s probably a really nice guy, but as a potential Bills draft selection) because I watched the games and saw how much he sucked. I have no idea what his stats are and honestly don’t care. Sure you don't. Edited April 10, 2011 by DreReed83 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 QB_A - DAN MARINO QB_B - JOE MONTANA QB_C - JIM KELLY QB_D - RYAN LEAF QB_E - JAMARCUS RUSSELL QB_F - BRADY QUINN QB_G - BRETT FAVRE According to some of you, Dan Marino, Joe Montana, and Jim Kelly would've had HORRIBLE careers because they sucked and were inaccurate in college, while Brady Quinn, Leaf and Russell would've torn it up because they were accurate. I guess Cam Newton WILL be better than Joe Montana and Dan Marino since his college numbers were better. As far as I can remember, Jamarcus Russell also put up prolific numbers in the SEC and won many games including a national championship as well and had a great record in college. Why? Because I've educated all the Newton supporters that his numbers and accomplishments are BS? Your welcome for the education. Sure you don't. You have educated absolutely NO ONE about anything. Are you DreReed83 or are you actually 1billsfan? I've liked many of your posts, but this is not one of them. I support newton. I think he has a chance to bust, as most players have a chance to bust. I don't support him because of stats. I support him because when I watch him play, I see a dynamic athlete that has a great arm, legs and good presence in the pocket. It has nothing to do with his stats, but if you think you taught me something, Congrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) I took the one that has steady improvement year after year !! Edited April 10, 2011 by T master Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Why? Because I've educated all the Newton supporters that his numbers and accomplishments are BS? Your welcome for the education. No because you took on a foolish position of judging prospects based on stats alone by acting the fool yourself. What's your position on Newton pro or con? Who knows what it is since you prefer to try and attack fellow members of this board with silly nonsense designed to entrap somebody so you can go around being smug. I suppose there's nothing better than being a sanctimonious twit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreReed83 Posted April 11, 2011 Author Share Posted April 11, 2011 No because you took on a foolish position of judging prospects based on stats alone by acting the fool yourself. What's your position on Newton pro or con? Who knows what it is since you prefer to try and attack fellow members of this board with silly nonsense designed to entrap somebody so you can go around being smug. I suppose there's nothing better than being a sanctimonious twit. If you bothered to read any of my posts, MY point is that you can't base the future of a QB off college stats. If you don't bother to read any of my posts, then i suggest you shut your trap. This post was strictly for the people that keep bringing up his college accomplishments and say that accuracy can't be improved. I suggest you read my other posts before you say anything. You're just making yourself look ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddog69 Posted April 11, 2011 Share Posted April 11, 2011 Those who hate Locker because his numbers suck and accuracy can NEVER be improved. Right? Don't be afraid to vote now. You have it wrong. They say that Locker's accuracy can never be improved but Ryan Fitzpatrick's can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreReed83 Posted April 19, 2011 Author Share Posted April 19, 2011 You have it wrong. They say that Locker's accuracy can never be improved but Ryan Fitzpatrick's can oooh. oops. I guess Montana being a career 56-57% passer in college, then being considered Joe Cool and one of the most accurate and precise passers in NFL history was just pure luck too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 oooh. oops. I guess Montana being a career 56-57% passer in college, then being considered Joe Cool and one of the most accurate and precise passers in NFL history was just pure luck too. Its not "luck", but considering all the other QBs to have a college career like Montana and flop in the NFL, it's considered an exception. Sure there will be some players to improve their accuracy, but more often than not, they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 oooh. oops. I guess Montana being a career 56-57% passer in college, then being considered Joe Cool and one of the most accurate and precise passers in NFL history was just pure luck too. You do realize that completion % and accuracy have little to do with one another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts