|
mlmdub130 02-04-2010, 10:25 PM Brennan is not starter material. He built up his rep in college, piling up huge stats on a pass happy team against inferior opponents(much like Tebow). The only real team he played at Hawaii was Georgia in the Sugar Bowl and he got destroyed. If Shanny does indeed bring in a vet to back up JC, Brennan is toast. Too many good QBs coming out in the next few seasons for Shanny not to take one. Remember, if we didn't gamble on Colt, he would have gone undrafted. For someone who set NCAA passing records, it is strange for nobody to take a chance on him til the 6th round, and of course in was our screwed up FO that did.
yes the sec is a terrible conference just awful don't you agree gmscud
GTripp0012 02-04-2010, 11:25 PM Colt was a college stud who was very much worth the 6th rounder we spent on him to see if he could adjust to the pro game, but if you're being honest with yourself, you've likely seen enough to conclude that there's not all that much there.
A new system is a new hope for guys like Brennan, but he's just holding a roster spot until someone more intriguing comes along.
GMScud 02-04-2010, 11:30 PM yes the sec is a terrible conference just awful don't you agree gmscud
Yeah seriously. I mean, Florida and Alabama's defenses this past season could probably outperform the Rams and the Lions. To say Tebow piled up stats against "inferior" competition is just flat out wrong. I'm not saying he'll be a great pro, but that statement couldn't be further from the truth.
PHazard 02-04-2010, 11:42 PM Colt Brennan > Chase Daniel. Chase couldnt throw a spiral half the time and he kept bein put in to throw a 5 yard fade pass lol. And as far as him "piling up stats like tebow", they are COMPLETELY different QB's. Tebow is more likely to run if his 1st option isnt open, Brennan trusts his arm! We need a QB who whole heartedly BELIEVES he can do it. His college coach Jones interviewing him to go to Hawaii said "If u're afraid to be great dont come here, but if you arent scared, we can do this and make sumthing special." I think that alone made Brennan commit to Hawaii cuz there aint no way some1 is gon call him scared without him proving them WRONG! They went undefeated his last year. Then lost to Georgia in the bowl game. But like i said, his WHOLE team was outmatched. If they are puttin pressure on you with ONLY 3 men and can drop 8 in coverage, how can you succeed? That game displayed the Spread Offense's flaws. Not Brennan's. HE TAKES CONTROL OF THE HUDDLE! HE CONGRATULATES EVERYONE! God damn, he even learned SAMOAN to help the offensive lineman in Hawaii make line calls! I hear you on the inferior competition, but if u even watch highlight videos, its not like hes throwin to receivers that are blatantly wide open, or coverage was blown, he threads the needle ALOT and puts it where his guy can get it. He is dedicated to always improving. All those reasons are why I BELIEVE in him n think he deserves AT LEAST a shot. You guys bring up LeFevour (spread offense), Pike (spread offense), and Kafka (spread offense), So they are ALL in pass happy offenses and they didnt put up records like Brennan did. The records arent important to me or the NFL so ill leave that at that. But, my question is, WHY, with SOOOOOOOO many other needs, should we use a 4th round pick, on another SPREAD offense QB, when we havent tested the one ALREADY on our roster? Our OLine is garbage, we need MUCH more personnel to switch to a 3-4 (Bigger LB's, Big NT) a TRUE FS, prolly a CB if Rogers departs. If we bring in an undrafted QB after the draft and Shanahan says he beat out Brennan fair and square, so be it, but to waste a MID ROUND pick on another question mark just sounds Cerrato-ish to me
r08kessl 02-04-2010, 11:44 PM Yeah seriously. I mean, Florida and Alabama's defenses this past season could probably outperform the Rams and the Lions. To say Tebow piled up stats against "inferior" competition is just flat out wrong. I'm not saying he'll be a great pro, but that statement couldn't be further from the truth.
I'll never try to argue that the SEC is a bad conference because that's just a lie (even though after the first tier in any given year the competition drops off significantly), florida does play a terrible out of conference schedule, over the last two years (when tebow was a starter) they played:
Charleston Southern, Troy, FIU, Florida State (both years), Cincinnati, Hawaii, Miami Fl, the citadel, oklahoma
oklahoma and cincinnati only happened becasue of bowl games, and I would argue that if it wasn't tradition Florida wouldn't even play FSU.
Dirtbag59 02-05-2010, 12:37 AM I'll never try to argue that the SEC is a bad conference because that's just a lie (even though after the first tier in any given year the competition drops off significantly), florida does play a terrible out of conference schedule, over the last two years (when tebow was a starter) they played:
Charleston Southern, Troy, FIU, Florida State (both years), Cincinnati, Hawaii, Miami Fl, the citadel, oklahoma
oklahoma and cincinnati only happened becasue of bowl games, and I would argue that if it wasn't tradition Florida wouldn't even play FSU.
This is the SEC's M.O. They talk up their conference and use it as an excuse to avoid playing quality out of conference opponents. You look at schools from the Pac 10, Big XII, and Big 10 then you find yourself hard pressed to find teams that schedule a Charleston Southern.
Oregon for example played Boise State, Utah, and Purdue. Purdue played Northern Illinois, Toledo, Oregon, and Notre Dame. Oklahoma played Miami, Tulsa, Idaho State, and BYU. Now all of these teams aren't world beaters but at least they're FBS schools. And usually if they do schdule and FCS school it's usually very rarely more then one where I've frequently seen SEC school schdule as many as two FCS school and no quality opponents to compensate for the two throw away games.
GMScud 02-05-2010, 12:50 AM I'll never try to argue that the SEC is a bad conference because that's just a lie (even though after the first tier in any given year the competition drops off significantly), florida does play a terrible out of conference schedule, over the last two years (when tebow was a starter) they played:
Charleston Southern, Troy, FIU, Florida State (both years), Cincinnati, Hawaii, Miami Fl, the citadel, oklahoma
oklahoma and cincinnati only happened becasue of bowl games, and I would argue that if it wasn't tradition Florida wouldn't even play FSU.
Well, first of all, Tebow was a starter the past three years, not two.
Oklahoma, Cincy, Miami, Florida St three times, and Michigan (bowl game 2007) isn't exactly terrible. In those games UF went 6-1. Every big time program plays a few cupcakes along the way. It's just how it is. So a few times a year Tebow got to pile up some stats on bad teams. It's also worth noting that he often didn't play in the second half of some of those games. He also played 24 games in 3 years against SEC defenses and went 20-4 in those games.
And what does the tradition aspect of your FSU argument have to do with anything? That's Bowden-led program from a BCS conference and with Tebow as a starter we went 3-0 against them, outscoring them 127-37. Plus we beat Miami 30-6 in 2008. The reason we play them is irrelevant. The outcome however is not.
GMScud 02-05-2010, 12:59 AM This is the SEC's M.O. They talk up their conference and use it as an excuse to avoid playing quality out of conference opponents. You look at schools from the Pac 10, Big XII, and Big 10 then you find yourself hard pressed to find teams that schedule a Charleston Southern.
Oregon for example played Boise State, Utah, and Purdue. Purdue played Northern Illinois, Toledo, Oregon, and Notre Dame. Oklahoma played Miami, Tulsa, Idaho State, and BYU. Now all of these teams aren't world beaters but at least they're FBS schools. And usually if they do schdule and FCS school it's usually very rarely more then one where I've frequently seen SEC school schdule as many as two FCS school and no quality opponents to compensate for the two throw away games.
Really? "Hard pressed?" 5 minutes on Wiki actually made it quite easy to prove you wrong:
Ohio State played Toledo and New Mexico State this past season. Michigan played Western Michigan, Eastern Michigan, and Delaware State. USC played San Jose State. Texas played UTEP and Louisiana-Monroe. Oklahoma played Idaho State and Tulsa. Penn State played Akron and Temple. Iowa played Northern Iowa and Arkansas State. Some of the schools you listed actually work against you. Idaho St? Northern Illinois? Toledo? Come on. Just because they are "FBS" schools doesn't make them any less of a cupcake.
The list goes on and on.
Like I said, every big time program schedules cupcakes. There's a reason the SEC has won 4 straight and 5 out of the last 6 national championships. They're the best. If I'm wrong, another conference can go ahead and step up and win one at some point.
CultBrennan59 02-05-2010, 01:15 AM Heres my last opinion on Bradford and Clausen which may persuade you all:
I think a great way to evaluate QB's is by seeing how good their receivers are. For example; A lot of people thought Matt Ryan would not be a good pick and isn't that good of a QB. I always thought he looked like a great NFL QB, people didn't really like him because he was slightly slow at times, and he threw lots and lots of picks. Then I saw an analyst say "We look at the receivers he had to throw to...NO ONE!"
Which brings me to my point. Think about it, Tom Brady had only David Terrell to throw to at Michigan, and Terrell was out of the NFL 4 years later and was a 6th round pick.
Peyton Manning had Peerless Price and that was it at tennessee
Drew Brees had No One to throw to at purdue
Rivers, Manning and Roethlisberger had no one to throw to aswell (except cotchery was there a little bit)
Aaron Rodgers had no one at Cal
Jay Cutler ....nope no one at all
Now, one of the exceptions to this rule is our own QB Jason Campbell. He had great running backs, but no WR's
So lets look at our 2 current QB's that are graded as first rounders
Jimmy Clausen has Golden Tate (projected first rounder), Michael Floyd (projected first rounder) and Rudolph the TE (projected 5-6th rounder).
He had great players to throw to.
Sam Bradford had Jauqin Igeliasis (3rd Rounder), Manuel Johnson (7th rounder), Brian Broyles (Jr. Will probably be a first rounder, definite second rounder) and Jerhmain Greisham (projected first rounder)
I think you got to go with Bradford because he was able to do the most with the poorer quality receivers. Watching a lot of Clausen highlights, there were a lot of times that he would under or over throw Tate, and Tate would somehow come up with the ball. Bradford, would put the ball where his receivers would be the only ones to get it. Other than greisham, bradford didn't have that many good receivers, and was able to get the ball to the receivers and not make them have to adjust for it nearly as much as Clausen.
Let's get Sam.
bdubin 02-05-2010, 12:52 PM Bradford is a bust!!!!!!
|