Navarre will kick some arse

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
84,450
Reaction score
33,165
conraddobler said:
Well with a few assumptions you could make a case that this Navarre thing will work.

One assumption is that he knows enough of what he is doing to be better at reading the field than either of the other two QB's.

.

With enough assumptions I could probably convince myself King played well too. Ok I don't think I actually could.

What my thing with Navarre is good things is big kid, strong arm, throws a tight spiral, experienced in college, lot of big games, throws a good deep ball, smart kid, hard worker.

He's a very inaccurate passer, ok throwing downfield, not OK at the other stuff. He had a habit of throwing high, and laying out his WR's for big hits at Michigan. he's the type of guy where if he plays in the NFL the way he did in college he's going throw a lot of picks for TD's because it's usually the short routes that are pick sixed. If he can get that out of his system he has a chance.

The main reason IMHO why he was a 7th round pick is this is a guy who played a TON of football, at a major school, known for developing QB's. He's bright kid, very hard worker, and after 5 years at Michigan with all that going for him, he was awful at the combine and workouts. In other words scouts felt he is what he is, won't get much better, he's not a guy who just needs coaching or who hasn't played much etc, he's a guy who is probably as good as he'll ever be and that might not be good enough.

Chris Simms had a similar college career but Simms had excuses, competing with applewhite, lousy coaching, and Simms wowed people at workouts. Thats why he went so much higher.
 

Vomit Boy

Veteran
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Posts
491
Reaction score
0
Why doesn't anybody here ever call out Tango for his relentless assault on real facts.

Why is he allowed to spew made up stuff for the most part and get away with it?

Isn't he the classic definition of an internet troll?

Just posting stuff to hear himself post?

Shheesh!
 

Pariah

H.S.
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Posts
35,345
Reaction score
14
Location
The Aventine
AzCards21 said:
Interesting timing on for the points on your list. I just spoke to someone who attends the practices and has watched Navarre working out. Interesting points.

Accuracy of throws- I was told Navarre is currently the most accurate.

Quickness of reads- Navarre hands down. This alone could make our line much better.

Footwork- By far the most glowing of praise, I was told Navarre is so much better at his drops and being exactly where the o-line expects him to be it's unreal. The sacks will happen but it won't be because JN has drifted out of the protection ring.

It will be interesting to see just how this all comes together Sunday. Sure doesn't sound like we'll be watching a typical skittish rookie.
That certainly is an encouraging report!!
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,655
Reaction score
61,403
man I think you guys are setting yourself up for a HUGE letdown. Come on guys - there's had to be some reason that this kid with all his accuracy, big arm and footwork dropped to the LAST ROUND OF THE DRAFT. Most bona-fide studs came into the league and struggled their first year if not their second as well. Don't expect too much and you'll be pleasantly surprised by whatever good does come I mean he's playing a below average D-line with a rookie undrafted FA RB behind him.

I hope he's what you guys are thinking he could be in this game - and maybe in the future he can be, but I think we are all sooooo desperate for QB play that I think we could me up in there and people would rationalizing how because no one knows who I am or has tape of me that I could throw some wrinkles at them and pull off a win.
 

nidan

Oscar
Supporting Member
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
24,410
Reaction score
1,828
Location
Plymouth, UK
Vomit Boy said:
Why doesn't anybody here ever call out Tango for his relentless assault on real facts.

Why is he allowed to spew made up stuff for the most part and get away with it?

Isn't he the classic definition of an internet troll?

Just posting stuff to hear himself post?

Shheesh!
I reread this thread and can see no reason why you posted this other than to troll yourself. :nono:

Take a rest we will see you tomorrow
 
Last edited:

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
84,450
Reaction score
33,165
cheesebeef said:
man I think you guys are setting yourself up for a HUGE letdown. Come on guys - there's had to be some reason that this kid with all his accuracy, big arm and footwork dropped to the LAST ROUND OF THE DRAFT. Most bona-fide studs came into the league and struggled their first year if not their second as well. Don't expect too much and you'll be pleasantly surprised by whatever good does come I mean he's playing a below average D-line with a rookie undrafted FA RB behind him.

I hope he's what you guys are thinking he could be in this game - and maybe in the future he can be, but I think we are all sooooo desperate for QB play that I think we could me up in there and people would rationalizing how because no one knows who I am or has tape of me that I could throw some wrinkles at them and pull off a win.

I really think it's the whole #3 QB syndrome. Greisen, Parsons, the #3 QB is always the guy we look at as the potential sleeper, the steal. Like you I hope it's true but if you really look at the situation it makes no sense.

This rookie is the most accurate thrower on the team(never completed 60% in college), has the best pocket presence(sacked 9 times in the Rose Bowl), has all this poise, and yet we kept him inactive the first 11 games for what reason?

And if he's so clearly the best QB and that's why Gree has been personally working with him on the scout team, don't we wonder why Green is spending more time with the scout team offense than the real offense whe our offense sucks?
I hope he's the next Brady or Warner, but I don't expect it.
 

Tangodnzr

ASFN Lifer
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
3,837
Reaction score
5
Location
Idaho
earthsci said:
LOL.....I don't want to dim your bulb too much here, but radio signals do travel farther at night.

Radio waves naturally travel in straight lines, so you would naturally expect (because of the curvature of the earth) that no radio station would transmit farther than 30 or 40 miles. And that is exactly the case for ground-based (as opposed to satellite) TV transmissions. The curvature of the earth prevents ground-based TV transmissions from going much further than 40 miles (64 km). Certain radio stations, however, especially in the short-wave and AM bands, can travel much farther. Short-wave can circle the globe, and AM stations transmit hundreds of miles at night.
This extended transmission is possible is because of the ionosphere -- one of the layers of the atmosphere. It is called the ionosphere because when the sun's rays hit this layer, many of the atoms there lose electrons and turn into ions.

As it turns out, the ionosphere reflects certain frequencies of radio waves. So the waves bounce between the ground and the ionosphere and make their way around the planet. The composition of the ionosphere at night is different than during the day because of the presence or absence of the sun. You can pick up some radio stations better at night because the reflection characteristics of the ionosphere are better at night.

Link

I don't think so!!!

I don't know who wrote that article, but it contains a lot of half-truths and a mish mash of differing concepts.

I was a microwave specialist in the army. I spent a full year at Ft. Monmouth, Red Bank, N.J. studying electricity, microwave communications and a specialized form of it called tropospheric scatter.

The initial part is right. VHF and UHF frequency communications (radio and tv waves) ARE what is commonly termed LOS or Line of Sight communications, and indeed have a normal limit of the stated 30-40 mile range. Those standard waves do not depend upon reflection from the ionosphere or troposphere for their primary propogations and receiving.

That is part of why all long distance telephone communications for so many years, and even still today, are carried by microwave. Even standard microwave tranmission is still line-of-sight. That's why you see the "dishes" or "towers" on mountain or hill tops, just like standard radio transmitters.

Tropospheric scatter is where a super powerful beam is bounced off the troposphere and back to earth then picked up. But that takes not only sophisticated, and superpowerful transmitter to generate the initial beam, but also super, super sensitive specialized receivers to pick the reflected beam up...because so much power is lost in that transmission.

A standard am radio doesn't even come close to being able to do that.
No only for the frequency range itself, but the power needed for the receiver is just not there, among other things.

Like I said, the primary reason you sometimes seem to get better reception at night with some stations is because they have super powerful transmitters.
At sundown, many smaller, weaker, stations that only have enough power to broadcast a limited local range, either cut down on their power at night, and some even go off the air all together.

The big powerful stations, like KFBK out of sacramento, who I used to listen to Giant games at night, I could only get in Washington after dark.
But that was because the stations like that actually often boost up their power output at night.
I believe, but it's been so long, I'm not totally sure, but the FCC limits how much power can be used during the day, and a stations license limits how much power it can use, by its "class", just like in Bars....what class of license they have determines what beverages they can sell.

So its more a combination of increased power to the "Big" stations that try to jack up their power at night, when the regulations lessen and there are less competing stations on bordering bandwith frequencys.

Have none of your ever experienced not only the fading at times in those situations, but also one station "crowding in" on another too. Your listening to the Giant game and suddenly your hearing Vivaldi from some classical station?

Modern day communications have now gone to satellite reflection rather than tropospheric scatter, in many cases.

But plain old LOS radio signals do not rely much, if any, on reflected beams for their transmission. There may be some, but its far from the primary signal path. At least enough so the "better reception at night" is more a matter of power usage and sharing or competition than some nebulous, "ionospheric reflection".
 

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
84,450
Reaction score
33,165
nidan said:
I reread this thread and can see no reason why you posted this other than to troll yourself. :nono:

Take a rest we will see you tomorrow

I think it was the ionosphere stuff and to be honest I have no idea who's right. I've heard the same thing Earthsci wrote, but Tango's explanation sounds just as plausible.
 

chickenhead

Registered User
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Posts
3,109
Reaction score
77
My hopes for Navarre this weekend are extremely realistic. I am hoping for him to take sacks without fumbling, complete his passes inside of 15 yards, and resist the urge to throw it up for grabs. I don't expect him to have much more than 150 yards in passing...200+ if one of his receivers breaks away for a long play. That sort of scenario, plus a possible defensive TD, is what can win this game for us.
 
OP
OP
A

AzCards21

Registered User
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Banned from P+R
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Posts
18,054
Reaction score
61
Location
What?
cheesebeef said:
man I think you guys are setting yourself up for a HUGE letdown. Come on guys - there's had to be some reason that this kid with all his accuracy, big arm and footwork dropped to the LAST ROUND OF THE DRAFT. Most bona-fide studs came into the league and struggled their first year if not their second as well. Don't expect too much and you'll be pleasantly surprised by whatever good does come I mean he's playing a below average D-line with a rookie undrafted FA RB behind him.

I hope he's what you guys are thinking he could be in this game - and maybe in the future he can be, but I think we are all sooooo desperate for QB play that I think we could me up in there and people would rationalizing how because no one knows who I am or has tape of me that I could throw some wrinkles at them and pull off a win.

I set myself up for a kick to my football loving nads every week. Why make this one any different. :(
 

Skkorpion

Grey haired old Bird
LEGACY MEMBER
Supporting Member
Joined
May 9, 2002
Posts
11,026
Reaction score
5
Location
Sun City, AZ
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?
 

earthsci

That Rapscallion!!
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
8,300
Reaction score
1
Location
Phoenix
Tangodnzr said:
I don't think so!!!

Earth's atmosphere changes how radio waves travel. Out in space they zip along at light speed and travel vast distances: from Earth to Pluto, for example.

Here on Earth, when a signal travels in a straight line from transmitter to receiver, Earth blocks the signal at the horizon. Viewed from eye level, the horizon is about 2.5 miles away but, from the top of a 500-foot transmission tower, it's about 100 miles distant. Line-of-sight signals, thus, go about 100 miles.

When we pick up an AM signal from farther than that, a cloud-like layer of ionized particles in the air (called the ionosphere F-layer) bent the radio wave down to reach us. The drawing at the right shows this. When a radio wave enters the F-layer air, it slows down and therefore bends to a new direction. A soda straw in a glass of water appears bent due to the same phenomenon.

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.

Link
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,655
Reaction score
61,403
Skkorpion said:
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?

yeah but none of those guys listed above came into our set of circumstances - Delhomme had two great RBs behind him and didn't start a game until at least his third year - Johnson started after four years on the bench with Cris Carter, Jake Reed, Robert Smith and ALL-PROS on the O-line and even Brady didn't come in until his second year.

As to your last sentence - could anyone be worse at ANYTHING than King was the last couple weeks - holy crap was he beyond awful.
 

Tangodnzr

ASFN Lifer
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
3,837
Reaction score
5
Location
Idaho
In regard to Navarre starting, I think his fate, as I stated before, is going to primarily depend on the protection he gets, more than anything.

I agree with those who say, that all this Navarre "hype" is indeed really nothing more than "talk" at this point.

Who knows what's going to happen?
I know I really have no clue.

I don't expect him to "light it up". I will be very surprised if he does.
I'm not saying it CAN'T happen, but the odds just don't seem very great for it.
Too many variables have to be present, and I just don't think all "the aspects are going to be aligned" as an astrologist might say in order for that to happen.

So many of those expressing their optomism seem to base part of that on the fact that he will have time to throw.
I think that's really is going to be THE main decisive factor.

But likewise, had Josh been given more time, in earlier games, his performance probably would have been better too.

Once again, it doesn't take a hall of famer to be reasonably accurate if they have the time to throw, and conversely, even a hall of famer will tend to look bad if his offensive line has him running for his life constantly.

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.
And I think the stats will indeed back me up in that.
 

Pariah

H.S.
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Posts
35,345
Reaction score
14
Location
The Aventine
Russ Smith said:
I've heard the same thing Earthsci wrote, but Tango's explanation sounds just as plausible.
I've been trying to research this on the internet, and haven't found a ton, but what i have found seems to support Earthsci's version (I didn't find anything to support Tango's version):

http://www.ccrane.com/news/sky-wave.04.22.02.aspx

http://www.sangean.com/101.html

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00166.htm

http://www.wonderquest.com/radio-waves.htm

And, on a side note, my name was plastered all over some of these sites I read because I share it with the guy who discovered cosmic radio waves. :thumbup:
 

StatsAmare

Playin' 110%
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Posts
103
Reaction score
0
Location
Surprise, AZ
cheesebeef said:
man I think you guys are setting yourself up for a HUGE letdown. .
Every game the cards don't win is a "HUGE letdown" to me......... Might as well think positive.:D
 

conraddobler

I want my 2$
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Posts
20,052
Reaction score
237
earthsci said:
Earth's atmosphere changes how radio waves travel. Out in space they zip along at light speed and travel vast distances: from Earth to Pluto, for example.

Here on Earth, when a signal travels in a straight line from transmitter to receiver, Earth blocks the signal at the horizon. Viewed from eye level, the horizon is about 2.5 miles away but, from the top of a 500-foot transmission tower, it's about 100 miles distant. Line-of-sight signals, thus, go about 100 miles.

When we pick up an AM signal from farther than that, a cloud-like layer of ionized particles in the air (called the ionosphere F-layer) bent the radio wave down to reach us. The drawing at the right shows this. When a radio wave enters the F-layer air, it slows down and therefore bends to a new direction. A soda straw in a glass of water appears bent due to the same phenomenon.

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.

Link

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.
 

earthsci

That Rapscallion!!
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
8,300
Reaction score
1
Location
Phoenix
AzCards21 said:
Yep, that explains it.

jeff pretty much had it right. The stations have to turn down their power so there isn't a bunch of interference all over.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,655
Reaction score
61,403
Tangodnzr said:
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.
And I think the stats will indeed back me up in that.

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.
 

conraddobler

I want my 2$
Joined
Sep 1, 2002
Posts
20,052
Reaction score
237
Russ Smith said:
I really think it's the whole #3 QB syndrome. Greisen, Parsons, the #3 QB is always the guy we look at as the potential sleeper, the steal. Like you I hope it's true but if you really look at the situation it makes no sense.

This rookie is the most accurate thrower on the team(never completed 60% in college), has the best pocket presence(sacked 9 times in the Rose Bowl), has all this poise, and yet we kept him inactive the first 11 games for what reason?

And if he's so clearly the best QB and that's why Gree has been personally working with him on the scout team, don't we wonder why Green is spending more time with the scout team offense than the real offense whe our offense sucks?
I hope he's the next Brady or Warner, but I don't expect it.


The only theory I have that could explain why it is possible is that for right now there has never ever been this low of a premium on pure pocket passers who really can't scramble all that well.

I think it's possible they wiffed on a guy who just like you said seemed blah at the combine but then again famous gunslingers probably only looked good when you put them in an actual gunfight.

Everyone wants the next McNabb or Vick or Brett Farve when he was younger even Shannahan was willing to take less of a pocket passer and a better scrambler.

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!!!!!!
 
Top