406 replies to this topic

[Mexal]

Jaime L, on 12 April 2012 - 03:29 PM, said:

Agreed. And yes the question with drafted QBs is how much of their success is nature and how much is nurture. I'm guessing Tom Brady had the necessary intangibles to be successful whereever he went but probably not to this extent. Then again he goes to the wrong place and he never has a chance to show what he can do as a lowly 6th rounder and maybe only is successful after his second go-around.

I agree. I think Brady had the intangibles to succeed (i.e.: work ethic, football smarts, will to win) but I do think that he was successful in a large part because of the system he's in. I cannot imagine Brady being successful in a system like Bratkowski used in Cincinnati because his strengths don't lie in the vertical passing game even though he can be good at it. NE almost certainly adapted their offenses around Brady's strength and weaknesses as well as the personnel around him whereas a lot of teams wouldn't. They have a system and instead of adapting, they try to fit a square peg in a round hole until that peg breaks. So I do think that the environment has a lot to do with it.

Edited by Mexal, 12 April 2012 - 04:28 PM.

[Mexal]

Mack Kilimaro, on 12 April 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

I think that teams scout even the consensus No. 1 picks that they have no chance to draft because it expands their base of scouting knowledge. Then in the future you might see Prospect X and think, hey, he looks just like that guy we couldn't draft four years ago because someone picked him #3... Then, too, in the case of a bust like Russell, you have all your work and deliberations to go through and figure out what you missed in rating him higher than he should have been. Pretty fascinating stuff when you get down to it.

I've been very active this year in following all the prospects and as you said, it's incredibly fascinating. I think it's the most interesting part of the offseason by far and it can be a lot of fun.

[BLU-RAY]

Irsay is actually trying to tweet up Tannehill's value, telling other teams to trade with MN for the 3rd pick.  1) What is the benefit to him here, and 2) I hate this guy so much.

[Howdyphillip]

DVD ROTS, on 12 April 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Irsay is actually trying to tweet up Tannehill's value, telling other teams to trade with MN for the 3rd pick.  1) What is the benefit to him here, and 2) I hate this guy so much.

I don't get his angle here either. His glowing endorsement of Tannehill pretty much confirms to me that he will be a bust. I don't think Irsay has made anything close to a good football decision this year.

[ROLF]

Strangely, and in a tie-in to previous posts, Billick just said on ESPN that he thinks Tannehill is very comparable to Russell in which he has all the physical skills, but not the resume/longevity of consistent high play.

[DanteGabriel]

Howdyphillip, on 12 April 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

I don't think Irsay has made anything close to a good football decision this year.

I think releasing Manning was a good decision.  Almost every aspect of carrying out that decision was bungled though.

[Lightning Lord]

Howdyphillip, on 12 April 2012 - 05:35 PM, said:

I don't get his angle here either. His glowing endorsement of Tannehill pretty much confirms to me that he will be a bust. I don't think Irsay has made anything close to a good football decision this year.

Maybe he's just talking the guy up so that a team will take him and then bust?  It would delay any rebuilding team a couple of seasons while they find out if he's a real deal or not.