Quote:
Originally Posted by biffle
If you're using a percentage of what previous QBs did as the chances of a current QB succeeding, then that is exactly what you're doing. The chances of Griffin or anyone else working out don't have anything to do with what players they had nothing in common with did or did not do.
|
biffle, the percentage is the percentage.
You don't get to pick and choose (cherry pick).
Quote:
Originally Posted by biffle
Leaf and Russell are good examples because they are QBs who were drafted extremely high and didn't work out, therefore-by what ever standard you're using - the 'chance' Griffin works out is supposedly much lower because of them. And those are two players we now know were doomed by horrible attitudes and work ethics, whcih makes them about as similar to Robert Griffin as Danny Devito is.
|
Dude, c'mon.
You're inventing a point and making a comparison of
your own choosing, then arguing against it.
And I'll repeat it here in case you forgot:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut
With Griffin the gamble is the same as with any rookie QB where historically the success rate is right around 50/50 its even lower when using the 'franchise' QB or 'elite' QB label as the measure of success.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by biffle
The real world doesn't work that way. Griffin has virtually nothing in common with Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell, whether you're looking at backgrounds, education, skillset, production, character or temperments. Not to mention, Griffin will be stepping into a situation that will likely bear little resemblence to what the other 2 walked into.
So, to suggest the former's chances of success decline by some percentage because of the failures of the latter two is really wrongheaded, at absolute best.
|
|
Notice again that my quote doesn't contain the comparisons you claim then argue against.