Navarre will kick some arse

[Tangodnzr]

The ionosphere bends signals best at night because the Sun is no longer ionizing the atmosphere then. That's why you pick up distant AM signals at night. An AM signal can hop all the way around the world at night, bending down from the ionosphere and reflecting back up from Earth: hopping in that fashion and ultimately going vast distances.

OK, this is my last post in regard to this.

Yes, I had forgotten about the ionosphere bending some of the low-frequency, high wave-length signals more than the higher frequency, shorter wave ones.

But I still maintain that is NOT the MAIN reason we are usually able to hear some stations better at night.

referring to the passage quoted above, yes, theoretically an AM beam "might" be able to be bounced around the world, but it would take one god-awfully strong transmitter to produce a signal strong enough to "last" the distance and its corresponding power loss.

So, in that sense, I guess you could say it can be a combination of the two.

There are only so many possible individual frequency's available in the AM bandwidth. That's why the FCC regulations on power, and the corresponding "Class" of broadcast license.

Two stations are allowed the same frequency only if their power is limited enough that they don't compete in the same geographical area.
So you could have 620 K hertz in Phoenix and Buffalo, St Petersburg, and Nome Alaska, but you can't have them in the same broadcast area.

At night the competition is less, and the big powerful transmitters dominate more easily into any area where a competing one may also exist too.

I hope people have learned something worthwhile.

My intent is not to prove anyone "wrong" as such.

I will leave it at that.

 

[Pariah]

Yes, I had forgotten about the ionosphere bending some of the low-frequency, high wave-length signals more than the higher frequency, shorter wave ones.

For some reason, that sounds like a Marvin the Martian line.

 

[earthsci]

I know at night sometimes when I was a kid listening to the radio I'd notice one station take over another on certain nights and I remember listening to an AM station from Chicago in St. louis and thats about 300 miles away.

I went to high school in Sierra Vista (south of Tucson) and at night we could pick up a radio station from Oklahoma City and another from LA.

 

[conraddobler]

For some reason, that sounds like a Marvin the Martian line.

That is hilarious!

My favorite was the Buggs Bunny and Wylie E. Coyote Super Genius one where the coyote actually talks.

He sends an ACME varmit killing saucer after Bugs. The dial on the saucer says like roadrunner, rabbit and something else so Buggs pops out of his hole with a chicken head on and writes in Coyote and dials it to that blowing up Wylie..

A close second is a real Roadrunner one where Wylie dosen't talk but he buys a whole crate of ACME flying sticks of dynamite and lets them loose out of an air balloon and all through the rest of that cartoon they land on him during every possible attempt to kill the roadrunner. That one is always good for a belly laugh.



Ah the memories.

 

[Russ Smith]

Russ:

Brad Johnson - 9th round pick (back when there were 9 rounds and more)
Tom Brady - 6th round (At Michigan, no less)
Jake Delhomme - undrafted free agent.

The scouts are often clueless when it comes to evaluating QBs.

On the other hand, Navarre showed me nothing but lead feet at minicamps. He was big, slow, and inaccurate. Even at Flagstaff, he didn't look very good.

I'm still curious to watch him play. He can't be worse than King at the short passes can he?

Johnson was a basketball player when he showed up at FSU, that's why he was a late bloomer in football.

Brady was a highly regarded catcher at Serra HS, lefty hitter from the school that produced Barry Bonds(cheater) and Gregg Jefferies. Because he announced he was going to Michigan to play football he dropped from first/second round to 18th round and never did play pro baseball. He split time at QB much of his Michigan career, that's why he was a late bloomer.

Don't know the Delhomme story beyond he played at a small school.

Navarre was a football player, started 42 games, he's not a late bloomer.

 

[Russ Smith]

I remember Jim Hart though and it was almost as if he was too lazy to run so he learned how to rifle the ball where he wanted it. Incidentally he still holds the fewest sack record at 8 and that might have been a 14 games season but still that's amazing because Hart was a statue if there ever was one.

Pass blocking for a QB that can perfectly step into the pocket every time is much easier than blocking for a knucklehead like Josh that seemed clumsy at best dropping back.

I've said in other threads that the possiblity is remote at best for the reasons you laid out. Still it's exciting because you know what?

WE ARE DUE!!!!!!

Hart was amazing, but there were other things at work, there was no in the grasp rule so a big strong guy like him could break tackles and not get sacked when today it's sack. He had a great OL except for that one guard Dobler

I agree, teh QB plays a big role in the perception of an OL, I think the reason people think the OL played better of late is King was more "consistent" in his drops than Josh who just doesn't seem to "get" that a 7 step drop means 7 steps. King was horrible at everything else so it didn't matter.

I think Navarre is experienced and well coached at teh college level, he'll be where he's supposed to be. But when the bullets are live and he starts seeing guys like Dre Bly and Fernando Bryant closing on passes like most rookies, he'll struggle.

Would love for him to be the next Marino.

 

[jefftheshark]

First:

Some stations go off the air at night so they don't interfere with the so-called "clear channel" 50,000 watt powerhouses like WCCO-AM. For example, there are other stations around the country that operate during the daytime on 830, WCCO's frequency. But those stations have to go off the air at monthly average local sunset so they don't interfere with WCCO's signal.

The reasons for this are:

• AM radio waves travel much farther at night than in the daytime.

• Back when this clear channel system was set up (in 1934), there were radio stations only in larger towns and big cities. The clears were established and protected at night so that people in the countryside and small towns would be able to get news and entertainment over the radio.

• The fact that every small town has a radio station now days is generally ignored as the clears are generally owned by the big media conglomerates who don't want to give up any of their power and range, and have the clout to keep that from happening.

Second:

If Navarre is more accurate than either of previous experiments at QB, then he should be more successful. QB's, however are like mutual funds in that past performance is not a guide for the future. We might be in line for a "let-down" or we might be pleasantly surprised. That is what makes this season so great.

Third:

Wily T. Coyote is great, but I think the Bugs Bunny cartoon where Elmer Fudd sings "Kill the wabbit, kill the wabbit" to the tune of Wagner's "Flight of the Valkyries" is hard to beat.

Thanks to all for a great thread.

The Shark

 

[JasonKGME]

Johnson was a basketball player when he showed up at FSU, that's why he was a late bloomer in football.

Brady was a highly regarded catcher at Serra HS, lefty hitter from the school that produced Barry Bonds(cheater) and Gregg Jefferies. Because he announced he was going to Michigan to play football he dropped from first/second round to 18th round and never did play pro baseball. He split time at QB much of his Michigan career, that's why he was a late bloomer.

Don't know the Delhomme story beyond he played at a small school.

Navarre was a football player, started 42 games, he's not a late bloomer.

How Bout Matt Hasselbeck also went late 6th Round.

 

[Cheesebeef]

How Bout Matt Hasselbeck also went late 6th Round.

what about Matt Hasselbeck? The guy has had 1 and 1/2 good seasons with his only complete seasonof playing well being last year. The jury's still out on him if you ask me.

 

[red desert]

what about Matt Hasselbeck? The guy has had 1 and 1/2 good seasons with his only complete seasonof playing well being last year. The jury's still out on him if you ask me.

I agree. When all is said and done in Seattle this offseason, he may be the one they let go.

 

[Tangodnzr]

Man - if the top 6 QB's in the league(Manning, Brady, Favre, Culpepper, McNabb, Pennington) weren't successful right off the bat in their first(Culpepper) or second years(everyone else) - you might have an argument there. Hell - I could throw Marc Bulger and Trent Green in there as well and even Mike Vick . . . and even then looking back on the past - I could throw Drew Bledsoe, Dan Marino, John Elway and Joe Montana in there - but why continue - you already ignored the previous debunking of this flawed theory last week.

The best QB's in the game get the game by the time they start their second season - or at least begin their 3rd.

I'm not sure what it is you are trying to prove here.
Payton Manning... No. 1 pick in 1998 draft.
1998 - Team Record = 3 wins, 13 losses Set a number of Rookie QB records...passes(575), completions(326), and yards(3,739) He was sacked 22 times. BTW his completion rate was 56.7%
"In his first 9 starts, Manning appeared indecisive and forced some throws. The result was 12 touchdown passes and 18 interceptions. But in his final 7 games, he made better decisions and quit forcing the action. The result: 14 TD's and 10 int's." -- Sporting New Football annual, 1999
He also had the luxury of Marshall Faulk in the backfield, and a decent offensive line, and oh by the way.....Marvin Harrison.
The offensive scheme, under Tom Moore, he played under was one that utilized short drops, keeping most of the offensive options involved, which he fit comfortably with.

1999 - Team Record = 13 wins, 3 losses. Manning picked up his game even a notch more. QB rating 90.7. 26 TD passes. 4, 135 yds passsing. Cut ints to 15.
Rookie Edgerrin James filled in for the departed Faulk nicely.

2000 - Team Record 10-6. Lost wild card game to Miami. Set team record 4.413 passing yards and 33 TD's breaking Johnny Unita's club record.

Tom Brady..... 6th round, 2000
2000 - wasn't even listed on preseason roster for 2001 and those not enamored with Bledsoe were generally clamoring for Michael Bishop to be his replacement.
Brady played one game, threw 3 passes, completing one for 6 yards and a QB rating of 42.4.
2001 - T eam Record = 11 wins, 5 losses. Super Bowl champs. Bledsoe started the first 2 games, and never played again. Brady took over from there.
He also had the good fortune to have Bill Belichick as HC and Charley Weiss as OC. New England's offense was primarily based on a power running game with short, quick conservative passing game.

Brett Favre...Aquired in trade with Atlanta 1992 for a 1st Round draft pick. Originally drafted 2nd round by Atlanta Falcons, 1991
1991 - played in 2 games, 5 pass attempts, 0 completions, 2 interceptions. QB rating = 0
1992- played under new Packers HC Mike Holmgren. Got his first start in game 3 after Don Majkowski was hurt.
The 1993 sporting news football annual: "A year in Holmgren's system should make Favrea better QB and prevent the wrong formations he called and ill-advised passes he threw.

Dante Culpepper...1st Round 1999 (#11)
1999 - Played in 1 game, 0 passes.
2000 - Team Record 11-5 , 1-1 in playoffs losing to Giants 41-0 Culpepper had a great year with a 98 rating.
2001 - Team Record 5-11, and the wheels fell off, Green got fired with 2 games remaining, although Culpepper himself, dropped off, playing only 11 games, still played OK, nothing to write home about.


Donovan McNabb ...1st Round 1999 (#2)
1999 - played in 12 games, started 6. 216 attempts/ 106 completed (49.1%). 8 TD, 7 Int. Rating 60.1
2000 - Team Record= 11wins, 5 losses, 1-1 in playoffs losing to the Giants 20-10. 58% completion rate, 21 TD, 13 ints, 77.8 Rating.


Chad Pennington....1st Round 2000 (#18)
2000 - played in 1 game, 5 passes, 2 completions for 67 yds. 1 TD.
2001 - played in 2 games, 20 passes, 10 completions for 92 yds, 1 TD
2002 - Played 15, started 12, 68.9 comp %, 22 TD, 6 ints, 104.2 rating. He didn't start until the 5th game of the season.


Marc Bulger - signed as free agent in 2001
2001 - did not play in any games
2002 - played and started in 7 games. 214 passes, 138 completed, 1826 yds, 14 TD, 6 int. 101.5 rating
2003 - 15 games. 22 TD, 22 int, 81.4 rating

Trent Green 8th Round 1993(Chargers); free agent Redskins 1995; Free agent Rams 1999; Traded to Chiefs in 2001.
1993 - did not play
1994 - did not play
1995 - did not play
1996 - did not play
1997 - played 1game, 1 pass, 0 comp. 39.6 rating (Redskins)
1998 - 15 games 14 starts, (Redskins), 54.6% completion rate. 23 TD, 11 int
1999 - did not play (Rams)
2000 - played in 8 started 5. 16 TD, 5 int. 60% completion, 101 rating
If you go back and check my posts the last 3 years you will see I have ALWAYS maintained that the "norm" or ideal situation is to work a young QB in gradually and not start on a regular basis until sometime into their 3rd year.

I maintained that all along with Josh. Go back and check (you and 11 seem good at that these days )

The only QB on your initial list to start regularly their Rookie year was Payton Manning, and he blew away a lot of rookie records and is now already challenging some of Marino's marks. A classic case of the exception to the rule....which your list really is.....taking the prime QB's many of them 1st rounders and using them as your reference point. '
But even those top draftee's hardly ever played their 1st year and the ones that played their 2nd, usually didn't really hit their stride until their 3rd yr.

The only one that even comes close to making a case for a lower round drafted QB to have any success early in their career is Brady.

And...some of those QB's who did play much their 2nd year, often did it because the starter got hurt and there wasn't much choice in the matter.

Most coaches, if they can don't usually plan on a QB making a consistant impact until their 3rd year AS THE NORM.

There will always be the exception. Especially if you start citing hall of fame QB's like Marino, Montana, Elway, and soon to be Favre, etc.

These guys are uniquely talented individuals, even for the pro game.

Pennington is what I would call the "model" situation. He wasn't rushed into the starting job right away, but allowed to develop, not starting until the 5th game of his 3rd year.

And Trent Green?
You evidently missed a little homework. He never played in a game until his 5th year, and then he only played in 1 game and threw 1 pass.

On the other side of the coin look at some of the recent high drafted QB's who have been rushed into starting "too soon".

Kyle Boller
Carson Palmer
Drew Brees
Akili Smith
Tim Couch
Chris Weinke...was old to begin with
Joey Harrington....started but left a lot to be desired and showed he needed more time to develop
David Carr..started his rookie year, but didn't exactly set the world on fire
Byron Leftwich..same same

And again these guys were the "cream of the crop", high draft picks.
Certainly not lower round picks who suddenly became NFL stars.

The list goes on and on....so back to the original point....to expect a 6th round pick like John Navarre to do it, on this team and its given circumstances right now, is not very realistic at all. Impossible...no, probably not....but you bet your money on it.....I'm certainly not betting any of mine.

 

[Cheesebeef]

The only QB on your initial list to start regularly their Rookie year was Payton Manning, and he blew away a lot of rookie records and is now already challenging some of Marino's marks. A classic case of the exception to the rule....which your list really is.....taking the prime QB's many of them 1st rounders and using them as your reference point. '
But even those top draftee's hardly ever played their 1st year and the ones that played their 2nd, usually didn't really hit their stride until their 3rd yr.

And Trent Green?
You evidently missed a little homework. He never played in a game until his 5th year, and then he only played in 1 game and threw 1 pass.

The list goes on and on....so back to the original point....to expect a 6th round pick like John Navarre to do it, on this team and its given circumstances right now, is not very realistic at all. Impossible...no, probably not....but you bet your money on it.....I'm certainly not betting any of mine.

Uh - let's see here - your argument was that it takes 3 full seasons for QB's to get it - then you tried to apparently change MY argument to that it happens in year one - which I have NEVER said. I personally believe that a majority of good QB's and ALL OF THE GREAT QB's get this game down by year two - plain and simple - you showed nothing to disprove that theory. Instead - you somehow came up with the bizarre notion that I was saying it was all about rookie QB's and that guys who started in their second year's didn't hit their stride until their third. Then you brought up Favre - neglecting to mention that he took over a horrible Packers team and led them to a 9-7 record and threw for 18 TDs over 13 picks - then you showed me in Donovan's second year him taking the horrid Eagles to 11-5 and throwing 21 TDs versus 13 picks and then made some kind of argument that Brady shouldn't be included as such even though he came in his second year and went out led the Pats to the Championship - and then you just ignored Mike Vick who came in his second year and single-handedly put Atlanta on his shoulders to take them to the playoffs - so tell me - is leading revolutions of bad football teams (like Favre, McNabb, Brady, Vick) not "getting it" in their second year? Sure those guys have gotten better - but they already GOT IT by their second years and then continued to get better and remain the best QB's in the game - same with previous years - the reason Montana and Elway and Marino were brought up because THEY ONLY VALIDATE THE ARGUMENT that simply put - the best QB's have it by the second years - it has nothing to do with high draft picks or where they were drafted - period - you are making that distinction Tango - not I.

And as far as Trent Green being in his fifth year - why don't you do your homework - just because he was drafted didn't mean he was in the league(which I would assume would be a pre-requisite to getting 3 years of NFL experience - wouldn't you think?) - The guy never made an NFL club until 1997 and then went out and lit it up his second year IN THE LEAGUE.

You say most QB's get it in their third year - I'll give McNair and Pennington as late bloomers and bona-fide STUD QB's - but as I showed the best QB's in the league - Favre, McNabb, Brady and the best QB's of all time - all GOT IT by their second years and then continued to get better and better.

And then at the end of your argument you somehow intimate that I believe Navarre is going to come in and set the world on fire - I seriously think that you might be insane to think this is my position on the matter here. Anyone who thinks we will get crushed considering we ahve a 4th round rook at C, with a 7th round rook at QB with an undrafted FA RB behind him can't think Navarre will be all that successful in his first year - otherwise - prey tell - for what other reasons do you think I think we'll get crushed?

As far as my list being the exception to the rule - THAT IS MY POINT - The EXCEPTIONAL QB'S GET IT BY THEIR SECOND YEAR FOR THE MOST PART - PLAIN AND SIMPLE - good lord man.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Brett Favre...Aquired in trade with Atlanta 1992 for a 1st Round draft pick. Originally drafted 2nd round by Atlanta Falcons, 1991
1991 - played in 2 games, 5 pass attempts, 0 completions, 2 interceptions. QB rating = 0
1992- played under new Packers HC Mike Holmgren. Got his first start in game 3 after Don Majkowski was hurt.
The 1993 sporting news football annual: "A year in Holmgren's system should make Favrea better QB and prevent the wrong formations he called and ill-advised passes he threw.

Dante Culpepper...1st Round 1999 (#11)
1999 - Played in 1 game, 0 passes.
2000 - Team Record 11-5 , 1-1 in playoffs losing to Giants 41-0 Culpepper had a great year with a 98 rating.
2001 - Team Record 5-11, and the wheels fell off, Green got fired with 2 games remaining, although Culpepper himself, dropped off, playing only 11 games, still played OK, nothing to write home about.

Marc Bulger - signed as free agent in 2001
2001 - did not play in any games
2002 - played and started in 7 games. 214 passes, 138 completed, 1826 yds, 14 TD, 6 int. 101.5 rating
2003 - 15 games. 22 TD, 22 int, 81.4 rating

ALWAYS maintained that the "norm" or ideal situation is to work a young QB in gradually and not start on a regular basis until sometime into their 3rd year.

Kyle Boller
Carson Palmer
Drew Brees
Akili Smith
Tim Couch
Chris Weinke...was old to begin with
Joey Harrington....started but left a lot to be desired and showed he needed more time to develop
David Carr..started his rookie year, but didn't exactly set the world on fire
Byron Leftwich..same same

this what cracks me up sooooo much about arguing with you. You point out Brett Favre - I guess trying to break down my argument, yet fail to post his numbers that in his second year he led the Pack to a 9-7 record and threw more TDs than Picks - i'd call that getting it in his second year.

You then go on to list Bulger - showing that he only played in seven games - yet failed to metnion that he 7-0 in those games and then went out due to injury - you then also failed to mention that the next year he led the Rams to a 12-4 record - again - validating what I've been saying that for the most part -the best QB's get it in their second years.

You also neglected to mention Bledsoe in there as well - I know - it would my "expection to the rule" theory which really is about only the best QB's anyway(meanign the best QB's are the exc3eption to the rule because - wait for it - THEY ARE EXCEPTIONAL)

And then the kicker - that the "norm"/ideal situation is that QB's not start on a regular basis until sometime into the third year - but then you go into everyone bascially playing in the league right now who WAS put in right away or by their start of their second season - whether they were ready or not - really showing that in fact - "norm" is that QB's go in early - out of the starting NFL QB's this season - 23 of 32 were either starters their rookie seasons or begininng their second campaigns - whether or not they're successful depends on other matters (such as if they are good enough or not) - but then you're take on the ideal situation is that they go in there as well at some point in their third year - well - do me a favor - name me the multiple All-pro QB's, besides Pennington(who I actuallu don't even think has been named All-Pro yet) and McNair who HAVE gone on to be mutliple big time performers(I'll give you Aikman - even though in his second year he marshalled a 1-15 club to a 7-7 record the following year before he got hurt and Babe Laufenberg had to take over making the Cowboys miss the playoffs in 1989 or 90). We're talking the last 25 years or so - the modern era of football which my theory pertains to. There is nothing "normal" or ideal about getting guys in there waiting until some point in their third year considering that the BEST QB's over the course of the last 25 years have figured out the game by their second seasons - leading teams to Super Bowls, Passing records, and playoff games.

I'd be interested to see how many late bloomers were really successful that we put on the bench and sat there - I may be wrong - maybe there are some guys that I'm not thinking of but I think you are living in antiquated times Tango. I'll give you Jeff Garcia(weakly), Pennington and McNair and Delhomme - but who else? The best guys in the league are those who by their second year were already leading their teams to the playoffs/going to Pro Bowls - it's not a shock that most of those teams aren the ones who don't have drastic shifts in their records and are continually amongst the best in the league.

It also cracks me up that you poo-poo the inclusion of Manning, Favre, Culpepper, McNabb, Brady, Vick as the exceptions to the rule and the only offer Pennington as your proof of this - when in fact - out of all the QB's in the league right now - Pennington is the exception to the rule as far as holding off on putting in young QB's. You crack me up man - keep it at it.

Does anyone here remember when Tango actually compared McCown to Chad Pennington at the end of last season - that was a good one!

 

[Tangodnzr]

Uh - let's see here - your argument was that it takes 3 full seasons for QB's to get it
Actually that is not, nor has ever been my contention.

I realize I did say:

And I have never, been one to expect rookie QB's to play top level, constistantly, until they've had an average of 3 years in the pros.

I realized, in reading it later, that I probably should have been more careful in choosing my words "an average of 3 years". That's why in my last post I made reference to what my expectations had been for Josh, and to go on and clarify that point, especially using Pennington as an example.
I have always said that I felt the "norm" that I think most organizations shoot for, is to have their young QB's "regularly" starting sometime in their 3rd year.
Sometimes, maybe even "often" reality doesn't always allow for strict maintaining of plans. Injuries occur. etc, etc.
Once in a great while you get a Payton Manning situation, but that is by far the exception, not the norm.
Like with Roth and the Steelers this year.....but even that isn't totally in the books yet. (but I must say just what he's done so far, is again certainly not the norm either, and I would really doubt the Steelers had any idea what was going to happen. I'll bet they would never have played him this year, had not Maddox went down).
Sometimes the combination of the talent and the situation leads to some success starting the 2nd year, which is what you did say originally.

The best QB's in the game get the game by the time they start their second season - or at least begin their 3rd.

So I wasn't as you say:

- then you tried to apparently change MY argument to that it happens in year one - which I have NEVER said. I personally believe that a majority of good QB's and ALL OF THE GREAT QB's get this game down by year two - plain and simple

To me there's a big difference between "the start of their second season" and "begin the 3rd". That's an entire year you seem to mush into one little time frame.

Even most of those top QB's who did become regular starters in their second year, generally still had a lot of areas needing to still be addressed going into their 3rd.

- you showed nothing to disprove that theory. Instead - you somehow came up with the bizarre notion that I was saying it was all about rookie QB's and that guys who started in their second year's didn't hit their stride until their third. Then you brought up Favre - neglecting to mention that he took over a horrible Packers team and led them to a 9-7 record and threw for 18 TDs over 13 picks - then you showed me in Donovan's second year him taking the horrid Eagles to 11-5 and throwing 21 TDs versus 13 picks and then made some kind of argument that Brady shouldn't be included as such even though he came in his second year and went out led the Pats to the Championship - and then you just ignored Mike Vick who came in his second year and single-handedly put Atlanta on his shoulders to take them to the playoffs - so tell me - is leading revolutions of bad football teams (like Favre, McNabb, Brady, Vick) not "getting it" in their second year? Sure those guys have gotten better - but they already GOT IT by their second years and then continued to get better and remain the best QB's in the game - same with previous years - the reason Montana and Elway and Marino were brought up because THEY ONLY VALIDATE THE ARGUMENT that simply put - the best QB's have it by the second years - it has nothing to do with high draft picks or where they were drafted - period - you are making that distinction Tango - not I.

Certainly I make a distinction between a first round QB who is drafted with the intent that he will become the eventual starting QB for an "era", however long that is...and one taken in the later rounds as a "project"; not even sure they'll ever be a starter; or may be an intended backup. As Russ has pointed out previously, there's a big difference between drafting someone generally considered "the future QB of the team", and someone drafted in the lower rounds, who are considered "more risky" or lacking somehow in some necessary qualities....whatever they may be.

You seem to be getting very good at putting words in my mouth or taking YOUR interpretation of something I say and posting it back as if your interpretation defines what I said...... and often those are not the same.

Without trying to be too "cheesy" in that respect myself, you seem to infer that somehow I am dissing those QB's that I listed. Not my intent at all.
Yes, sometimes there comes down the pike an exceptional talent crossed with the right circumstances, and you get earlier than normally expected results.
But that's my whole point. IT DOES HAPPEN, BUT IT'S THE EXCEPTION, NOT THE RULE!!!
How many times do I have to say that, for you to comprehend that?



And as far as Trent Green being in his fifth year - why don't you do your homework - just because he was drafted didn't mean he was in the league(which I would assume would be a pre-requisite to getting 3 years of NFL experience - wouldn't you think?) - The guy never made an NFL club until 1997 and then went out and lit it up his second year IN THE LEAGUE.
Huh? what do you mean? The guy was on the roster every year, he just rode the pine. He was getting coached, and doing all the things backup QB's do, he just wasn't playing in the games. Admit it, Cheesy, bringing him into the mix as proof of "rookie phenom" was not the most brilliant move you've ever made.

You say most QB's get it in their third year - I'll give McNair and Pennington as late bloomers and bona-fide STUD QB's - but as I showed the best QB's in the league - Favre, McNabb, Brady and the best QB's of all time - all GOT IT by their second years and then continued to get better and better.

Like I said before, Pennington, to me, is the best current example of how a team was able to stay pretty much with the "normal" planned development. The Jets had Vinny to run things until they felt the time was right to move Chad into the regular starting role. I don't think he was a "late bloomer" as such, the Jets simply had the luxury of giving him the best chance of succeding when they did make the final, lasting move.
Even though Favre had a decent year, his 2nd, under Holmgren, C'mon, Cheesy, you have to admit guys like him don't come along very often. He's already a lock for the hall of fame. He has not only one of the most amazing arms of any QB to ever play the game, but intangibles that NO ONE else has.
And even he was being criticized going into his 3rd year as still needing to learn to control himself more, and make better decisions.

And then at the end of your argument you somehow intimate that I believe Navarre is going to come in and set the world on fire - I seriously think that you might be insane to think this is my position on the matter here. Anyone who thinks we will get crushed considering we ahve a 4th round rook at C, with a 7th round rook at QB with an undrafted FA RB behind him can't think Navarre will be all that successful in his first year - otherwise - prey tell - for what other reasons do you think I think we'll get crushed?

Cheesy, what's the subject of this thread?
My comment was primarily just a generalized one in reference to that.
You seem hell bent on arguing once again, but sometimes I'm not even sure what it is you really are arguing ....or are you just arguing to be arguing?
When I said "you bet your money if you want to", was partially prompted simply because you seemed to be arguing my points about its too early to expect Navarre to come in and "kick some arse".
As far as my list being the exception to the rule - THAT IS MY POINT - The EXCEPTIONAL QB'S GET IT BY THEIR SECOND YEAR FOR THE MOST PART - PLAIN AND SIMPLE - good lord man.
Now let me make sure I "get" this.....
Are you saying that teams should plan their QB's development by the exception rather than "the rule" or "norm"???

 

[Tangodnzr]

this what cracks me up sooooo much about arguing with you. You point out Brett Favre - I guess trying to break down my argument, yet fail to post his numbers that in his second year he led the Pack to a 9-7 record and threw more TDs than Picks - i'd call that getting it in his second year.

You then go on to list Bulger - showing that he only played in seven games - yet failed to metnion that he 7-0 in those games and then went out due to injury - you then also failed to mention that the next year he led the Rams to a 12-4 record - again - validating what I've been saying that for the most part -the best QB's get it in their second years.

You also neglected to mention Bledsoe in there as well - I know - it would my "expection to the rule" theory which really is about only the best QB's anyway(meanign the best QB's are the exc3eption to the rule because - wait for it - THEY ARE EXCEPTIONAL)

And then the kicker - that the "norm"/ideal situation is that QB's not start on a regular basis until sometime into the third year - but then you go into everyone bascially playing in the league right now who WAS put in right away or by their start of their second season - whether they were ready or not - really showing that in fact - "norm" is that QB's go in early - out of the starting NFL QB's this season - 23 of 32 were either starters their rookie seasons or begininng their second campaigns - whether or not they're successful depends on other matters (such as if they are good enough or not) - but then you're take on the ideal situation is that they go in there as well at some point in their third year - well - do me a favor - name me the multiple All-pro QB's, besides Pennington(who I actuallu don't even think has been named All-Pro yet) and McNair who HAVE gone on to be mutliple big time performers(I'll give you Aikman - even though in his second year he marshalled a 1-15 club to a 7-7 record the following year before he got hurt and Babe Laufenberg had to take over making the Cowboys miss the playoffs in 1989 or 90). We're talking the last 25 years or so - the modern era of football which my theory pertains to. There is nothing "normal" or ideal about getting guys in there waiting until some point in their third year considering that the BEST QB's over the course of the last 25 years have figured out the game by their second seasons - leading teams to Super Bowls, Passing records, and playoff games.

I'd be interested to see how many late bloomers were really successful that we put on the bench and sat there - I may be wrong - maybe there are some guys that I'm not thinking of but I think you are living in antiquated times Tango. I'll give you Jeff Garcia(weakly), Pennington and McNair and Delhomme - but who else? The best guys in the league are those who by their second year were already leading their teams to the playoffs/going to Pro Bowls - it's not a shock that most of those teams aren the ones who don't have drastic shifts in their records and are continually amongst the best in the league.

It also cracks me up that you poo-poo the inclusion of Manning, Favre, Culpepper, McNabb, Brady, Vick as the exceptions to the rule and the only offer Pennington as your proof of this - when in fact - out of all the QB's in the league right now - Pennington is the exception to the rule as far as holding off on putting in young QB's. You crack me up man - keep it at it.

Does anyone here remember when Tango actually compared McCown to Chad Pennington at the end of last season - that was a good one!

I think most of this has been covered in my previous post.

However, the last sentence in bold, is once again to me just another example of your spinning and twisting things to fit your own view.
The only comparisons I have ever made between Josh and Pennington, that I know of, were in reference to what I've already said about Chad being what I call the "model" situation to work from. I don't ever remember comparing their individual skills at all.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I think most of this has been covered in my previous post.

However, the last sentence in bold, is once again to me just another example of your spinning and twisting things to fit your own view.
The only comparisons I have ever made between Josh and Pennington, that I know of, were in reference to what I've already said about Chad being what I call the "model" situation to work from. I don't ever remember comparing their individual skills at all.

You actually got me on the Trent Green one - I'll give you that - looking at this page gave me the wrong idea - I thought he was drafted and then never stuck with anyone:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/2547/career

my bad on that one - funny enough though that he isn't in the TOP echelon of playes - os while ONE guy in my list doesn't pass mustyer it's still not as laughable as your argument, which quite simply doesn't hold true.

As far as the McCown-Pennington comparisons - don't make me do this oh senile one . . . I mean you ONLY STARTED A THREAD ABOUT THE COMPARISONS OF THEIR PLAY ON THE FIELD!

I think the thread title kind of reads like so: McCown Reminds Me Of...

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21196

I really liked what I saw from McCown today. I am very encouraged that he can indeed be a great QB.

At this point there are 3 other QB's that come to mind after watching him today.

First, and this is not just me, or just today, but others have referred to seeing a little "Jake" in McCown. I agree with that, and i think that is generally more "good" than "bad".

About halftime I was thinking to myself....you know he looks a lot like Chad Pennington, on the field. Alter their jerseys on some "film" and you could proabably pass either off as the other.

By the end of the game, I was saying...you know what.....he reminds me even more......... of a young John Elway....again both in physical appearance and play on the field.

Few people will ever have the arm of a John Elway. But McCown still looks like he has a nice "30 caliber" arm to me. My vote is now officially in......he's a keeper. Go for it. We don't need to think about drafting a QB this draft.

Devote the time and energy to better improving the team somewhere else....be it CB, WR, or DL.


So Tango - go ahead and find somewhere in there where I'm "twisting" your words comparing McCown to Pennington - hell you go one step further and then compare him to Elway!?

It's okay to be REALLY clueless as to football knowledge - but with this level of senility - are you okay to live by yourself or are you in assisted living?

A young John Elway - that was a REALLY good one!

 

[Tangodnzr]

Geez Cheez....

Read what I wrote....I don't know how I could have made it anymore simpler or clear.....I was comparing them in physical appearance only. I never said anything about their skills.

And yes, I did compare Josh, to a "young" Elway, not only in physical appearance but in some skills too. And notice too, that I did say....I didn't think Josh has the arm Elway did.... but how many ever have?

enough of this.

Go stir the pot somewhere else. I'm finished here. This whole "conversation" has really become kinda pointless.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Geez Cheez....

Read what I wrote....I don't know how I could have made it anymore simpler or clear.....I was comparing them in physical appearance only. I never said anything about their skills.

And yes, I did compare Josh, to a "young" Elway, not only in physical appearance but in some skills too. And notice too, that I did say....I didn't think Josh has the arm Elway did.... but how many ever have?

enough of this.

Go stir the pot somewhere else. I'm finished here. This whole "conversation" has really become kinda pointless.

First of all Tango - every conversation with you is pointless - fun - BUT nice spin - and if you didn't use the word "again" here -

"About halftime I was thinking to myself....you know he looks a lot like Chad Pennington, on the field. Alter their jerseys on some "film" and you could proabably pass either off as the other.

By the end of the game, I was saying...you know what.....he reminds me even more......... of a young John Elway.... again both in physical appearance and play on the field."

Tell me oh brilliant one - what does the "again" up there refer to? Could it just possibly refer to a previous comparison you just made about altering jerseys and the guys looking the same on film? Maybe not - I guess considering your history - you could just really be into how guys look in their uniforms, than rather how they play - makes a lot of sense actually considering the Jake erotica.

That must be what it is though - I mean surely you knew starting an ENTIRE THREAD saying "Josh compares to" is obviously gonna be about how he fills out his uniform rather than his play on the field - actually - okay - I can buy that one.

 

[Pariah]

I'm finished here.

Tango furthers his MO by shutting down when evidence is presented to counter his perspective...

...it's okay to admit that you're wrong sometimes, Tandodanzr.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Tango furthers his MO by shutting down when evidence is presented to counter his perspective...

...it's okay to admit that you're wrong sometimes, Tandodanzr.

come on Pariah - a lot of people probably watch "film" just to see how people look in their uniforms. They're probably the same people that would imagine about how those same players look in tuxedos while picking them up for the prom. I have no problem with Tango's explanation - in fact it actually makes complete sense seeing as what we know about him and his infatuation with previous QBs.

 

[AzCards21]

15 hours till it's time to prove up. This is going to be one hell of a game no matter what.

Navarre= Team savior?
Navarre= Same old crap new name.

This will be interesting to say the least.

The only person in the world I would not want to be right now is John Navarre. Talk about being on the pressure point. Poor guy doesn't have a chance. If he does win it will be only against the lowly Lions. Sh*t if he wins two it's just the Lions and whiners.

Talk about a no chance opening to a career!

 

[AzCards21]

The only person in the world I would not want to be right now is John Navarre.

Actually I would like to be in his shoes. Nothing like a chance to shove a whole bunch of negativity down a lot of peoples throats. That would be sweet to have a chance like this.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Actually I would like to be in his shoes. Nothing like a chance to shove a whole bunch of negativity down a lot of peoples throats. That would be sweet to have a chance like this.

hell yeah! Although I would argue most of the "nay-sayers" here right now aren't spouting "negativity" - 21 - more like reality. He's in a really tough spot - I hope he blows my doors off - it wopuld be ncie have a good sunday again and be able to delude ourselves going into the Niners game that we still had a shot at the playoffs! Go Navarre!

 

[AzCards21]

hell yeah! Although I would argue most of the "nay-sayers" here right now aren't spouting "negativity" - 21 - more like reality. He's in a really tough spot - I hope he blows my doors off - it wopuld be ncie have a good sunday again and be able to delude ourselves going into the Niners game that we still had a shot at the playoffs! Go Navarre!

Sounds like you and I live for the same things.

My finest moments have always come when everyone say's it can't be done. I've never fell short in sports or work. It's a serious motivational factor and gets the energy focused.

I hope Navarre is like us. Failure is not an option.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Sounds like you and I live for the same things.

lots of booze and loose women? Speaking of which - it's about time to get started on Satty night!