http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/spo...2012/04/draft_winds_breaking_down_bran_1.html
Brandon Weeden special
Page 1 of 6
-
-
cant wait to read the write up after work. -
After Luck and RGIII there is not a QB in this draft good enough to be a 1st round pick. Do not care what the experts say, Weeden, Tannehill and the kid from ASU are all not very good QBs.
-
There is plenty of good WRs that will fit Philbins offense in the mid rounds, that if we took a QB in the 1st, we could be good for a lot of years.
dolfan7171 likes this. -
I'm not a guru. So I don't know if X QB is going to be great or not. Hell, gurus don't*know either and it is a crapshoot.....but good godamn, CK has an article the length of a small book, and to counter what he said all you could muster is a, "nope, Weeden sucks."
I mean that is just idiotic. If he's wrong at least put some effort into explaining why you think he's wrong or support your stance with something more than herp derp.
First the black lineman suck thread you started and now this.........weaksauce. -
I have RG3, Tannehill and Weedon all rated in the same range and in the first round. Cousins would be next with a second round grade. I have Russell Wilson rated higher than the consensus with a third round grade. I wouldn't consider Foles, Osweiler or any of the others before the fourth. Although Lindley would be intriguing as project that you developed over the next three years.
Bulldog likes this. -
vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member
-
-
And I don't care what your opinion of Weeden/Tanny/or Winston Churchill is, its just if its in response to a novel long article that had facts, research and effort, I'd think your rebuttal should have those things too. That's what is supposed to make this site better than the others. CK maybe wrong, but you damn sure did nothing intelligent or meaningful to counter him.Bulldog and GARDENHEAD like this. -
-
Great read CK.... thanks.
Now I'm even more sold on Weeden than I was before.ckparrothead likes this. -
Weeden's 2nd-3rd round draft advisory grade was last year when he was a year younger; therefore, IMO, being a year older will counterbalance the improvements he made in 2011 since every extra year counts greatly in his case.
-
-
texanphinatic likes this.
-
-
Guest
-
IMO judging him on his talent is unrelated to how much you'd like to invest in him. Personally, I wouldn't pay retail price for a car with roughly half the warranty remaining no matter how well it performs. Drop the price a bit and I might be sold. I would almost bet my only can of Blue Diamond 'Soy Wasabi' almonds that half the NFL feels the same way. -
-
IMO he's one of those QBs you look for every reason to not draft b/c nothing is really eye-popping even though he's a winner and finds ways to win.
If I had to pick one non first rounder of the past few years to become the next Brady, I'd say Cousins. He has the it factor in my eyes. -
PhinPhanatic likes this.
-
ToddsPhins likes this.
-
FYI, I just responded to the post in question on another item and again, I find nowhere in it where I put it up that any particular type of lineman sucks.
-
IMO Tannehill is jumpy to an extent in the pocket also. Even at his pro day film he jumped around like a jelly bean. Crazy feet. -
-
Been ringing that bell for months! As another poster wrote "Bleedin for Weeden" Imagine a trade back scenario that nets us Fleener/Weeden and any one of the following 3:
Jefferies
Perry or
Ingram
WOW!! -
Great work. Didn't get through all of it, but I will when I get home. I'd be thrilled with Tannehill or Weeden. I just worry about Weeden's age. I skimmed the part about value and age, but I still think it would be a big mistake to think the difference in age isn't a big factor.
-
Brandon Weeden is Chris Weinke. Wouldnt touch this guy any earlier than the 3rd, by then some team will snatch him up and regret it in 2 years.
-
-
Boomer likes this.
-
Fin D likes this.
-
-
-
Main arguments on age factor:
1. Chris Weinke. Same age. He went in the 4th round. But he was a 4th round prospect. Watch him play football in 2000. He was big and strong, had great NFL size and strength (body strength, not arm strength). He could move around. But he was inaccurate, and the ball came off his hand real inconsistently (ducks all aflutter). That's the kind of guy that goes in the 3rd or 4th round, despite Heisman and National Championship. Nowhere near Weeden's throwing ability (velocity, spin, consistency, accuracy). This is not a matter of dispute or difference of opinion. It's fact. So if a 4th round QB went in the 4th round despite age, how should that affect a 1st round QB?
2. Trent Richardson. Where would you take him? Tailbacks, even elite ones, don't affect the game as much as quarterbacks, but they do affect the game a lot. But the longevity isn't there for that position. A tailback goes downhill at 30-31 years old. A quarterback doesn't go downhill until 35-36 years old. The estimate for Trent Richardson's effective career should be about the same as Weeden's. So, if you'd take Richardson in top 10, why wouldn't you take Weeden?
3. Ryan Tannehill. Is 4 years younger than Weeden. Where would you take Tannehill? #8 overall? Would you take him #4 overall if you're Cleveland? If Weeden and Tannehill were the same age, which would you like more? If we assume Tannehill's career to be 12 years, 10 of them quality (post-learning curve), therefore we assume Weeden's career to be 8 years (12 minus 4), and if we assume same learning curve for both (not safe assumption, Weeden's should be shorter), then that's 6 quality years from Weeden as opposed to 10 quality years from Tannehill. Does that mean 28 year old Weeden is 60% as valuable as 24 year old Tannehill (6 / 10 = 60%)? How do you account for the fact that the 4 years that Weeden is missing are the expensive ones, since he'll still enter the league on a rookie contract? Logic dictates that years where the QB is highly talented yet highly paid are less valuable than years where the QB is highly talented yet low paid. Therefore, shouldn't the 6 quality years Weeden has be worth more than the 4 quality years he's missing, relative to Tannehill? Doesn't that change that 60% to something more akin to 75%?gunn34 and MonstBlitz like this. -
IF my aunt had a package she would be my uncle. -
Page 1 of 6