Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'NFL Draft' started by RollTide, Feb 11, 2006.
i dont want cutler. i love how you just pull things out of the air.
Jacob's career touchdown to int ratio is 6X. Matt lienart's is 4.3X. Jacob set the ncaa record for TD to int ratio in 2004 with a 10.25 ratio! The guy is simply good.
He is big at 6'4 226 lbs. He has a very good to great arm. Like byron leftwich his best season was not his last and i think people hold that against him. A mistake. I have read numerous reports about this guy and the biggest concern is that he didn't play top competition a stupid concern since he played his career in the same conference as leftwich-rothlesberger-pennington.
Jacobs vs leftwich
TDs and ints final 2 years of college
Jacobs 67tds-11 ints(ratio 6X)
Leftwich 71 tds-19 ints(ratio 3.73X)
jacobs 41tds-4 ints... 4002 yards
Leftwich 41tds-9 ints...4698 yards
Career completion rate
Average yards per attempt
Now lefwich is a little bigger and probably has a stronger arm but jacobs is the better runner of the 2.
Jacobs is a great prospect and he will very likely be available in rd 2. I just think there is awesome value there and i honestly think he will be the best QB in this draft. Hang me later if i am wrong but jacobs is a better value early in rd 2 than young is with that 3rd pick.
that's the thing, there is no formula to the draft. there is no science to it. you look at the game tape and make a decision as to who will be the better pro.
Once again, you twist logic in new an unique ways.
Is the Titans goal to find a "servicable quarterback"? If you want anyone to take your arguments seriously, why even reach like this?
The goal is to find a QB who will be a productive starter in the league for a number of seasons (at least five). And in the Titans case in this draft, we are talking about taking a QB chosen with a top three pick.
So we are comparing QBs taken in the top three since 1982 and those in the second round. And we are looking for quality production over multiple seasons -- not just a "serviceable QB". Here's the facts:
QBs taken in the top three picks of the draft from 1982 - 2001
Rick Mirer - bust
Heath Shuler - bust
Ryan Leaf - bust
Tim Couch - bust
Akili Smith - bust
That's 15 QBs taken in the top three. Four were total busts but eleven played multiple seasons. I see this as a 27% bust rate. All of those who were not busts took their teams to the playoffs at least once. Three are (or will be HOFers).
QBs taken in the second round from 1982 - 2001
Billy Joe Tolliver
The only players you have here which could remotely be considered quality are Farve, Esiason, Cunningham, Plummer and Brees. That's five out of 20. So we have 75% of those QBs taken in the second round amounting to little more than short-time starters, backups or pure busts.
So take a big whiff of those smelling salts yourself because when you use some decent logic here, you stand to get a quality QB with a top three pick 73% of the time to 25% if you wait until the second round.
Better than Leinart. Better than Young. Better than Cutler. You heard it here first, folks.
and what i don't understand is you're worried about young being exclusivly a shotgun qb. that's exactly what mcnair was, exaclty what leftwich was, and exactly what jacobs is.
they all played primarliy out of the shotgun in college. yet, for some reason young is different.
First off you didn't PROVE anything. It is impossible to prove any theory. All you can do is disprove theories. A theory holds true as long as it has not be disproven. Simple fact of science. It holds true with laws of gravity, behavior, and now the nfl draft. )
Seriously, there a lot of flaws in your theory. You're not taking into account the individual abilities of the personnel staff that selected them, the teams the 'successful' players were drafted to, etc etc. You are simply identifing one pattern that exists and putting your own meaning to it. For example, years ago we could have found a relationship between race and qb success rate. Would it have been because race was a factor in their success? Well there was a relationship, but the relationship was created by racism in the system- not by actual talent and value of the players. Your analyses have the same flaw (though not the politically heated reprecussions). They are usuing a correlation or a pattern that they see and tying to use it without out knowing what creates the pattern.
One could probably derive a formula to accurately predict the success of each player- if you had all the necessary variables. The problem is no one has those variables. Thats the why the draft is as much art as science.
What bugs me though is your misuse of stats. People say you can make a stat say anything you want. Thats not really true. But any person can use stats to support their arguements and state them as law. When actually every stat has a lof of qualifiers in it.
For example, you challenged the comparison of Pennington to Lienart and then tried to use stats back up your arguement. You cant do that. They played for and against very different teams. Not to mention that almost all of football stats are team stats. Yes even yards, completions, tds, and qb ratings. Which means comparing one athlete to another just using stats is erroneouus. Thats why no one will ever know if Larry Bird was/is better than Michael Jordan in their prime. Though we all have our own opinions. Maybe it would be better to use Kobe and Wilt these days- but you get the point.
The only real way to compare players is by their ability. Its a subjective judgment, which means everyone's point is valid and no one can "win" an arguement.
In this messageboard a poster tried to compare the abilities of Pennington and Leinart (arm strength, accuracy) but then you brought stats back into it. Again those stats are a meausure of a team's success. The only stat that I can think of that is not heavily based on team peformance is attempts or carries, but I dont really see the usefulness of those stats.
Personally, I think Cutler is the best Qb coming out in this draft. I can talk abilities all I want, but the first minute someone brings stats in I have to flinch. Not because they hurt my argument (though I have to admit they usually do) but because its not a good way to compare them.
Its all subjective- which is why we are able to debate the same topic for the next several months. )
You have proven you don't understand...
Read this line i have repeated this point many times. It lies at the heart of my whole argument and you have not read with enough comprehension to even know that..
What i'm saying and what i PROVED is that when you take away that top pick, the guys like elway aikman and manning the bust rate soars! Soars
That has been my whole point jeff. In vince young we are not drafting john elway, peyton manning, carson palmer, troy aikman or even drew bledsoe. Those guys were the first picks in their respected drafts. If John elway is in this draft we don't get him. If peyton manning was in this draft we would not get him. They would be gone! So they don't count. When you take away those first pick prospects, the guys who will be gone by the third pick you end up with garbage!
Manning-bledsoe-mcnabb-elway-aikman-testeverde-vick were all taken higher in their respected draft then were will be picking in this one.
That's why i made a list of QBs taken 2nd, 3rd and 4th to see what the results were without that top pick. That's why i made a list of QBs who were high picks but second at their position. To try and get a better idea what our odds were.
In vince young we would be drafting a guy with incredible talent but also with many question marks. He is not the caliber of prospect that aikman, manning, elway or palmer were. He is probably not equal to lienart either. Young did not play in a pro style offense, he did not take snaps from center. He won games more with his legs than his arm(see rose bowl) and has an unorthodox throwing motion. His arm while good enough to succeed is not as good as mcnair's.
Does that mean that young is not a quality prospect. No he is definitely worth a top 8 pick but is he the best option at 3rd?
The funny thing is I agree with your final conclusion. Its just your argument that I find faulty. :ha:
Your post makes no sense and in no way did i misuse stats. That's BS..
In the pennington-lienart comparison i didn't use stats at all to compare the 2 players head to head. All i said was that pennington is a good nfl player and used a stat(passing rating 92) to illustrate that. Since pennington's biggest problem as an nfl player is that he is injured often i brought up the FACT that lienart has been durable in college. So where is the misuse of a stat? The only other stat i used was that lienart is taller and he is. You have a problem with that. How?
It was another poster who said that lienart might be another pennington and i sure don't remember anything said about arm or accuracy. Are you seeing things?
As far as comparing players in ability how do you do that? Ignore their performance on the field? What constitutes ability then? How do you measure passing accuracy for a QB prospect? By the size of his jock? Or the percentage of passes completed?
Based on your logic we shouldn't keep score of nfl games. Let a few guys subjectively decide who won. Like boxing.
Vince is different bigtitan..
He is the only QB you mentioned that we are considering drafting with the third pick.
Your argument is fair, if mcnair and leftwich have been good players then maybe it's not that big a concern for young. I'll cross that off my list.
Thank you sir. I want you guys to make vince young's case on this thread. I want you to say why we need to draft this guy. Why is vince young essential to our team and why is he a better prospect than say a cutler or jacobs?