FantasySharks.com

There are two types of Fantasy Football Owners: Sharks and Chum, which are you?
It is currently Fri 10.31.2014, 14:17

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 286 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 20  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 16:22 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 08.22.2008, 08:18
Posts: 14050
Sand$: 39024
Donate
Location: Taking beer from your fridge
pit.gif
emjones2001 wrote:
rugger48 wrote:
emjones2001 wrote:
rugger48 wrote:
emjones2001 wrote:
The thing about finding the 'elite' QB: none of the past Super Bowl winning teams got their 'elite' QB when they were experiencing sustained losing (4+ yrs). In most every case they only had 2-3 consecutive losing seasons when they got their QB: basically the team was established and the QB was pretty much the final piece.



so what, the idea behind finding an elite qb is opportunity and need. If cleveland is sitting in the one of the top 2 spots, there taking a qb and it would be the right thing to do, period. I didnt read the article, but if it starting it in 1999 for your argument then something is wrong. What you want to look at is what i looks like from 2007 on thats when the rules started really changing and the game was moving to more of a qb\pass dominate league. Part of the reason isnt just based on success, the rules are significantly in favor of the pass game. If they changed the rules so that a rb has to get 1 yard past the line of scrimmage before the defense can touch him, what do you think the draft will look like this year? Now add in the rookie salary cap, guess what, qbs go fast and early.


In other words move on and join us in 2012 wont you.


No data supports picking a QB in the first round before you have at least a .500 team (specifically no more than 3 consecutive losing seasons). The only thing that the 1st rnd QBs taken from '07 on give their team is hope. Not one of the top QBs taken since '07 has even gotten past the 1st round except for Flacco and Ryan, both of whom are on teams where the QB was one of the last pieces instead of the first piece. While I agree that the league "favors" the passing game, the only thing that has translated to is below average teams jumping at QBs but are still no closer to the Super Bowl than teams without one. Draft a QB in the 1st round and you are locked into that pick for at least 3 years while they "develop" and even then it may not work. It makes much more sense to have your team solidly in place before you take that risk because having the pieces around the QB will help to shorten that "developmental window".

How's that for 2012? Did I join?




I said this before and Ill say this again, the next 10 years 8 out of the next 10 superbowls will be won by pass dominate teams, most of those teams the qb will probably 1st rounder qbs or elite qbs. In 3-4 years we will have this convo again, and we will see how washington,indy, detroit and carolina look then. Keep looking at stats, the steelers didnt win a superbowl til they drafted roethlisberger(15 years for cowher to win a sb), giants hadnt won in awhile til they drafted eli, saints were nothing til they got brees(yes I know 2nd round), indy we know that story. Big hole in all this is brady, but I doubt someone comes along like him in our lifetime.


Keep hoping that cleveland keeps trying to build there team from the right spots, but when players rookie contracts come up and those players either leave for greener pastures or more money all they have to do is go right back to the ticket booth and buy another 5 years on the merry go round. Maybe sometime in the next 10 years you might find yourself a trent dilfer or brad johnson, or they can draft richardson and be the same teams the jags or rams have been for the past 5 years.


and again if cleveland were in the first 2 spots in the draft they should and would take a qb, why because its the right thing to do. Even the experts agree. Cleveland has some decent pieces in place thomas,jackson,haden.

Quote:
How's that for 2012? Did I join



To answer your question, no. Thanks for playing.


Look at it this way, will Wash, Indy, Detroit, and Carolina win in the same window as the QBs you mentioned (Eli, Ben, Drew)? All of them are behind Ben, who did it in under 2 (I think we can safely say that none of the above teams are less than 2 years away). Eli and Brees took 3 years and maybe Detroit may be the closest to achieving that, which is optimistic.

In an era where a "franchise" QB comes out every year, you can shorten your road to the SB by getting the pieces first, make yourself a .500 or better team, and then go into the draft one year and get a QB. Your team is the best example of this and I can't understand how you can't see it...



because I told before, your simple just wrong, there is more to it than that, you need more than 1st and 2nd rouders to make your team you need to find plauers every where make the ones on the depth chart work. Players have to have a reason to stay, and if they think a qb is part of the formula and the team they are on doesnt have one some of them eventually leave and then your stuck trying to find more peices to the eqaution.


Quote:
your road to the SB by getting the pieces first, make yourself a .500 or better team, and then go into the draft one year and get a QB



No its not because, teams have to still find the pieces than try to look for a qb that happens to be one of the hardest positions to fill in the NFL. This is part of the reason that cleveland has been doing the same thing for years.


Look at it this way, when teams like the 4 I mentioned above keep winning and the browns are still trying to find that magical mix of players that will get them to the promised land you will understand what Im saying. The browns have been doing what your saying for years, its time to try something new. You never know you could end up being the next teams led by a no name qb, but those team are quickly forgotten.


Last edited by rugger48 on Sun 04.15.2012, 16:29, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 16:27 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sun 08.24.2008, 08:41
Posts: 1821
Sand$: 3829
Donate
Location: Off in the Cut
cle.gif
So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???

_________________
QB: Cutler, Palmer
RB: Forte, Gio, Ellington, Bradshaw, JHill
WR: ABrown, KAllen, TWill
TE: Olsen
K: Gostkowski
D: Browns, Phins


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 16:34 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sat 06.19.2010, 02:34
Posts: 4234
Sand$: 94
Donate
emjones2001 wrote:
So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???


correct


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 16:35 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 08.22.2008, 08:18
Posts: 14050
Sand$: 39024
Donate
Location: Taking beer from your fridge
pit.gif
emjones2001 wrote:
So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???



OK, hows that been working out so far for the browns?

again your not listening, what is the make up of the steelers those years, how many players came from 3rd round or later? how many free agents did we pick up in those years? How many undrafted player were on the roster?


I see your point, but the NFL disagrees with you.


Just for giggles, who do you think the browns take if they were in one of the top 2 spots in the draft? Who would you take if you were making the decision? This should be 2 answers, Im just wondering if they will be the same answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 16:37 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 08.22.2008, 08:18
Posts: 14050
Sand$: 39024
Donate
Location: Taking beer from your fridge
pit.gif
bjoemama2 wrote:
emjones2001 wrote:
So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???


correct



Your coach disagrees.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 16:40 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sat 06.19.2010, 02:34
Posts: 4234
Sand$: 94
Donate
rugger48 wrote:
bjoemama2 wrote:
emjones2001 wrote:
So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???


correct



Your coach disagrees.


f@ck the rams


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 16:59 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sun 08.24.2008, 08:41
Posts: 1821
Sand$: 3829
Donate
Location: Off in the Cut
cle.gif
Rugger, the Browns have not done what I'm saying since their return. In fact they have tried everything but that since they returned. Their main issue has been not to build primarily through the draft until they have a solid foundation in place and then kick the regime out and start over. They started in '99 picking a QB 1st with no weapons, then they went the route of trying to win at free agency. Then they tried to get the QB again but it didn't work. If I use your data from '07, there is no proof that "getting the Escalade and parking it on the street when I still live at mom's house" works. I know that buying a house with a garage and THEN buying the Escalade works.

To answer your question about the 1st 2 picks, I would see what I could get in a trade and move down. Way too many holes to fill to spend it on a position that will have just as much value next year. Again, there will be probably 2-3 "franchise" QBs next year and the year after that.

_________________
QB: Cutler, Palmer
RB: Forte, Gio, Ellington, Bradshaw, JHill
WR: ABrown, KAllen, TWill
TE: Olsen
K: Gostkowski
D: Browns, Phins


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 17:18 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 08.22.2008, 08:18
Posts: 14050
Sand$: 39024
Donate
Location: Taking beer from your fridge
pit.gif
emjones2001 wrote:
Rugger, the Browns have not done what I'm saying since their return. In fact they have tried everything but that since they returned. Their main issue has been not to build primarily through the draft until they have a solid foundation in place and then kick the regime out and start over. They started in '99 picking a QB 1st with no weapons, then they went the route of trying to win at free agency. Then they tried to get the QB again but it didn't work. If I use your data from '07, there is no proof that "getting the Escalade and parking it on the street when I still live at mom's house" works. I know that buying a house with a garage and THEN buying the Escalade works.

To answer your question about the 1st 2 picks, I would see what I could get in a trade and move down. Way too many holes to fill to spend it on a position that will have just as much value next year. Again, there will be probably 2-3 "franchise" QBs next year and the year after that.



again 5 years is a small sample size? Its more than data that makes this an easy decision. The outlook for this decade will tell you this. Nobody said you cant get the qb first and find the pieces later, since a qb isnt going to help, teams like indy and washington should be picking high next year to right? I have the NFL on my side whos on yours?

You didnt answer my question, what would the browns do and what would you do is the question?

Enjoy the merry go round.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 17:23 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sat 06.19.2010, 02:34
Posts: 4234
Sand$: 94
Donate
Rugger, you do know that the Steelers are the poster child team for inward-out building don't you?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 17:34 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 08.22.2008, 08:18
Posts: 14050
Sand$: 39024
Donate
Location: Taking beer from your fridge
pit.gif
bjoemama2 wrote:
Rugger, you do know that the Steelers are the poster child team for inward-out building don't you?



You do know this is not the same NFL that was in existence 10 years ago right? Its not that they built from the inward out, its where they got the players and what they did with them. The team isnt made up of 1st and 2nd rounders?


You do realize that any team in the first 2 spots in this draft who needs a qb would take luck or griffin without a 2nd thought, that should tell you something.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 17:51 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sat 06.19.2010, 02:34
Posts: 4234
Sand$: 94
Donate
rugger48 wrote:
bjoemama2 wrote:
Rugger, you do know that the Steelers are the poster child team for inward-out building don't you?



You do know this is not the same NFL that was in existence 10 years ago right? Its not that they built from the inward out, its where they got the players and what they did with them. The team isnt made up of 1st and 2nd rounders?


You do realize that any team in the first 2 spots in this draft who needs a qb would take luck or griffin without a 2nd thought, that should tell you something.


That's because the players they drafted 10 years ago are still playing for them, whereas other teams haven't had the stability or quality control.

This team is not built on 1st and 2nd rounders?

There are five 1st rounders on your defense alone. As well there should be.

Not to mention Worilds waiting in the wings as a 2nd round pick, along with Woodley, who is starting.

Regarding the first 2 spot in the draft, I do realize that the gm's occupying the 1st two picks are morons, and I don't expect anything more or less from them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 18:02 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 08.22.2008, 08:18
Posts: 14050
Sand$: 39024
Donate
Location: Taking beer from your fridge
pit.gif
bjoemama2 wrote:
rugger48 wrote:
bjoemama2 wrote:
Rugger, you do know that the Steelers are the poster child team for inward-out building don't you?



You do know this is not the same NFL that was in existence 10 years ago right? Its not that they built from the inward out, its where they got the players and what they did with them. The team isnt made up of 1st and 2nd rounders?


You do realize that any team in the first 2 spots in this draft who needs a qb would take luck or griffin without a 2nd thought, that should tell you something.


That's because the players they drafted 10 years ago are still playing for them, whereas other teams haven't had the stability or quality control.

This team is not built on 1st and 2nd rounders?

There are five 1st rounders on your defense alone. As well there should be.

Not to mention Worilds waiting in the wings as a 2nd round pick, along with Woodley, who is starting.

Regarding the first 2 spot in the draft, I do realize that the gm's occupying the 1st two picks are morons, and I don't expect anything more or less from them.



ok


Last edited by rugger48 on Sun 04.15.2012, 18:05, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 18:04 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri 07.07.2006, 10:59
Posts: 44760
Sand$: 99538
Donate
Location: The North Coast
rugger48 wrote:
emjones2001 wrote:
So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???



OK, hows that been working out so far for the browns?

We've just drafted awful players until the last 2 years, we aren't a good case for whatever argument you're trying to make. Pick a different team.

_________________
Follow me @mchamberlin32


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 18:08 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sun 08.24.2008, 08:41
Posts: 1821
Sand$: 3829
Donate
Location: Off in the Cut
cle.gif
rugger48 wrote:
emjones2001 wrote:
Rugger, the Browns have not done what I'm saying since their return. In fact they have tried everything but that since they returned. Their main issue has been not to build primarily through the draft until they have a solid foundation in place and then kick the regime out and start over. They started in '99 picking a QB 1st with no weapons, then they went the route of trying to win at free agency. Then they tried to get the QB again but it didn't work. If I use your data from '07, there is no proof that "getting the Escalade and parking it on the street when I still live at mom's house" works. I know that buying a house with a garage and THEN buying the Escalade works.

To answer your question about the 1st 2 picks, I would see what I could get in a trade and move down. Way too many holes to fill to spend it on a position that will have just as much value next year. Again, there will be probably 2-3 "franchise" QBs next year and the year after that.



again 5 years is a small sample size? Its more than data that makes this an easy decision. The outlook for this decade will tell you this. Nobody said you cant get the qb first and find the pieces later, since a qb isnt going to help, teams like indy and washington should be picking high next year to right? I have the NFL on my side whos on yours?

You didnt answer my question, what would the browns do and what would you do is the question?

Enjoy the merry go round.


By saying there is no proof that getting the QB first works is referring to the fact that none of the QBs taken in the first round since '07 have won a Super Bowl, which is the end goal. We will have to see if any of them wins by the end of the decade, and if they do track back to when they were drafted. Then you can say picking the QB first works for more than just bowing to the hype of rushing to get the "franchise" QB. None of them beat the example of Ben, which was based on getting the pieces first. Flacco and Ryan will be out of the Brees/Eli window unless they do it this year and they have the best chance of the entire list (Stafford JUST made the playoffs last year). Bottom line for me is I just haven't seen where when you are a team that has been below .500 for 4+ years getting a QB first is the road to the Super Bowl. Don't disagree that you need one, I just disagree that when you have multiple holes to fill that HAS to be the first one filled.

As I said in the earlier post, I would trade down if my team is devoid of talent at so many positions. How am I giving my "franchise" QB the best chance to be successful when I don't surround him with tools? I can get a couple of playmakers and get him the next year, because as we all know there will be a "franchise" QB next year. Browns made a reach for RGIII, but not so much that they were going to give up the farm...

_________________
QB: Cutler, Palmer
RB: Forte, Gio, Ellington, Bradshaw, JHill
WR: ABrown, KAllen, TWill
TE: Olsen
K: Gostkowski
D: Browns, Phins


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun 04.15.2012, 18:10 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 08.22.2008, 08:18
Posts: 14050
Sand$: 39024
Donate
Location: Taking beer from your fridge
pit.gif
OarChambo wrote:
rugger48 wrote:
emjones2001 wrote:
So if there is a franchise QB every year, why the rush? Oh, and the Steelers were 6-10 prior to Ben coming. Before that 10-5-1 and 13-3 before that (playoffs both years). Sounds to me like there were more pieces than the current Browns have. Giants were 4 seasons removed from going to the SB and made one more appearance before getting Eli. Saints were 3-13 before Drew showed up and before that hovered around 8-8.

I get it that the rules have changed and all that. Still doesn't mean that I need to go get him right now. Especially since a new "franchise" QB will be rolling out the following year. Sounds to me like you should accumulate picks, build a good foundation, then when you are ready to make a run go get a QB. Since all picks are inherently a risk why risk it all on a player that your team is not in its best position to maximize on the pick? If these QBs were coming out one every 3-4 years I would understand your point of rushing, but they are coming out every year???



OK, hows that been working out so far for the browns?

We've just drafted awful players until the last 2 years, we aren't a good case for whatever argument you're trying to make. Pick a different team.


regardless, the person Im having the discussion with doesnt even have enough sense to take the best players available if he was in the right spot to do it and the other person thinks the the 2 teams that are sitting in those spots are morons for taking those BPA. My point still stands.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 286 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 20  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: akromam90, Bing [Bot], c2a, Google [Bot], Mdmspop, nosman21, RotoMoto, statsareforlosers, Tacks652, Yahoo [Bot] and 20 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

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group