2014 NFL Thread

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Also, saw the Browns picked Hoyer to start game 1 of the season. I think it’s a smart move by them. See what Hoyer can do for you and if or when he fails, put in Manziel. I can see Manziel getting the starter job maybe by week 7 against the Jags unless something bad happens to Hoyer. Their first three games are against the Steelers, Saints, and Ravens. Three teams that might make Manziel look bad.[/quote]

Yeah, they will be calling for Hoyers head after three, just in time to turn around and play the Steelers again so that you get a direct comparison. Also, if he has made it that long, and with a middle light schedule he might, look at week 11. That new Texans D may be looking to send him some love from his old state. [/quote]

Ya, I think the Browns front office is basically sacrificing Hoyer to the football gods. I’ll be surprised if they win any of the first 3, which will temper the fan base expectations for the remainder of the year under Manziel. [/quote]

Winning 1 of their first 5 games would be a pretty decent start, which ever one is QB. Winning 2 would be a success. But know one is going to pump the breaks for Hoyer and realize that.

Conspiracy theory: You think the NFL knew what it was doing when it made that schedule?? Ravens, Saints, Steelers twice, Tennessee, to make sure you get Hoyer out of there, then it lightens up to Jacksonville and Oakland just in time for Johnny Football?[/quote]

I suppose it’s possible, but I’d have a hard time believing it. Does the schedule come out after the draft?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Also, saw the Browns picked Hoyer to start game 1 of the season. I think it’s a smart move by them. See what Hoyer can do for you and if or when he fails, put in Manziel. I can see Manziel getting the starter job maybe by week 7 against the Jags unless something bad happens to Hoyer. Their first three games are against the Steelers, Saints, and Ravens. Three teams that might make Manziel look bad.[/quote]

Yeah, they will be calling for Hoyers head after three, just in time to turn around and play the Steelers again so that you get a direct comparison. Also, if he has made it that long, and with a middle light schedule he might, look at week 11. That new Texans D may be looking to send him some love from his old state. [/quote]

Ya, I think the Browns front office is basically sacrificing Hoyer to the football gods. I’ll be surprised if they win any of the first 3, which will temper the fan base expectations for the remainder of the year under Manziel. [/quote]

Winning 1 of their first 5 games would be a pretty decent start, which ever one is QB. Winning 2 would be a success. But know one is going to pump the breaks for Hoyer and realize that.

Conspiracy theory: You think the NFL knew what it was doing when it made that schedule?? Ravens, Saints, Steelers twice, Tennessee, to make sure you get Hoyer out of there, then it lightens up to Jacksonville and Oakland just in time for Johnny Football?[/quote]

I suppose it’s possible, but I’d have a hard time believing it. Does the schedule come out after the draft? [/quote]

Probably. I should have checked that.

The Browns have a bye on week 4. Manziel will be the starter on or before week 5.

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Dude should have put his ego aside and learned another position. [/quote]

I definitely agree with you here. [/quote]

But look he is going to the way of Jesse Palmer, great college QB just cant cut it in the pro’s and now is going to be an announcer. Which is where he belongs. He is a good kid and he will have a great career announcing. [/quote]
Jesse Palmer is good. I’ve heard Tebow on ESPN and he is ok as an analyst so far.

[quote]Aggv wrote:
John football [/quote]

Please stop calling him john football.

[quote]chillain wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
John football [/quote]

Please stop calling him john football.
[/quote]

Johnny Goofball…? That’s what I’ve been calling him lately. Any other suggestions are welcome.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Dude should have put his ego aside and learned another position. [/quote]

I definitely agree with you here. [/quote]

But in what position could have been a legit threat?

Also, I think it’s worth noting that Elway, who knows a few things about QBing a Superbowl winning team, saw something in Tebow that was enough to show him the door. Sure, he had to make room for Peyton but why didn’t he keep Tebow as a backup? And why did the Pats cut him?

[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Dude should have put his ego aside and learned another position. [/quote]

I definitely agree with you here. [/quote]

But in what position could have been a legit threat?

Also, I think it’s worth noting that Elway, who knows a few things about QBing a Superbowl winning team, saw something in Tebow that was enough to show him the door. Sure, he had to make room for Peyton but why didn’t he keep Tebow as a backup?

[/quote]

Tebowmania was the worst thing that could have happened to him. No one wants a guy on their team who’s skill set puts him pretty squarely in a backup roll that has the type of rabid fan base that will call for him to start the moment anything goes slightly wrong. Especially when you invest as much in a starter as they did in Peyton.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:
Yeah but Tebow, unless I’m mistaken, was the guy who popularized the kneeling and giving thanks after each touch down. And that’s when Tebowing took off.
[/quote]

To be fair I’d say the media popularized it.

Anyway not to keep harping on old news. It just seems crazy to me that a team wouldn’t want a person of his caliber on their roster. Instead teams would rather have guys that punch their fiances, get popped for DWI for smoking weed, or spending time in prison for dog fighting.

I just don’t get it. [/quote]

You make some valid points but don’t you think the media has a talent for honing in on what’s popular? I think that’s what happened. Then the extra media attention, in turn, generates even more momentum until people grow bored or the next hot subject appears.

Just to clarify, I think the main reason Tebow’s phone isn’t ringing is due to his passing skills. That’s the cake. And Tebowing - for SOME teams - is the icing.

If (big IF) he can fix his mechanics, he might get another shot from an organization that doesn’t care one way or the other re: Tebowing - as long as he delivers the Ws.

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:

[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Dude should have put his ego aside and learned another position. [/quote]

I definitely agree with you here. [/quote]

But in what position could have been a legit threat?

Also, I think it’s worth noting that Elway, who knows a few things about QBing a Superbowl winning team, saw something in Tebow that was enough to show him the door. Sure, he had to make room for Peyton but why didn’t he keep Tebow as a backup?

[/quote]

Tebowmania was the worst thing that could have happened to him. No one wants a guy on their team who’s skill set puts him pretty squarely in a backup roll that has the type of rabid fan base that will call for him to start the moment anything goes slightly wrong. Especially when you invest as much in a starter as they did in Peyton.
[/quote]

This is what I’m trying to say. Sometimes too much attention isn’t necessarily helpful.

[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Dude should have put his ego aside and learned another position. [/quote]

I definitely agree with you here. [/quote]

But in what position could have been a legit threat?

[/quote]

I bet he would of been a pretty good tight end or FB. He could be a passing running back instead of a running qb.

[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:
Yeah but Tebow, unless I’m mistaken, was the guy who popularized the kneeling and giving thanks after each touch down. And that’s when Tebowing took off.
[/quote]

To be fair I’d say the media popularized it.

Anyway not to keep harping on old news. It just seems crazy to me that a team wouldn’t want a person of his caliber on their roster. Instead teams would rather have guys that punch their fiances, get popped for DWI for smoking weed, or spending time in prison for dog fighting.

I just don’t get it. [/quote]

You make some valid points but don’t you think the media has a talent for honing in on what’s popular? I think that’s what happened. Then the extra media attention, in turn, generates even more momentum until people grow bored or the next hot subject appears.

Just to clarify, I think the main reason Tebow’s phone isn’t ringing is due to his passing skills. That’s the cake. And Tebowing - for SOME teams - is the icing.

If (big IF) he can fix his mechanics, he might get another shot from an organization that doesn’t care one way or the other re: Tebowing - as long as he delivers the Ws. [/quote]

Ya, I agree.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]MinotaurXXX wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Dude should have put his ego aside and learned another position. [/quote]

I definitely agree with you here. [/quote]

But in what position could have been a legit threat?

[/quote]

I bet he would of been a pretty good tight end or FB. He could be a passing running back instead of a running qb. [/quote]

Excellent point.

Bradford out for the year already, haha. Poor Rams. They just can’t find a good QB who can stay on the field.

Always been a fan of Shaun Hill. Also there have been rumors of my boy mark going there…which would be ironic being as Chillain would always shit on him. I hope it happens mark needs a legitimate chance to start with a team that has some talent on the offensive end. Not that they are stacked but a good running game with a good tight end and some receivers with ability. Probably won’t happen with schotty being there but it still would be a nice spot for a qb that never got the credit he deserved on the jets

Edit

[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Always been a fan of Shaun Hill. Also there have been rumors of my boy mark going there…which would be ironic being as Chillain would always shit on him. I hope it happens mark needs a legitimate chance to start with a team that has some talent on the offensive end. Not that they are stacked but a good running game with a good tight end and some receivers with ability. Probably won’t happen with schotty being there but it still would be a nice spot for a qb that never got the credit he deserved on the jets

Edit
[/quote]

Kenny Britt, Chris Givens, and Tavon Austin, Jared Cook and that runningback group gives somebody several weapons there. I think Austin has a chance to bust out if he gets the ball. Kenny Britt has potential if he gets his mind right.

As well as getting his mind right…Britt is supposedly healthy and w/o knee issues and he is back with his old coach in which he had a very successful year with. Zac Stacey should continue right where he left off

[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Bradford out for the year already, haha. Poor Rams. They just can’t find a good QB who can stay on the field.[/quote]
The question is “is this it for Bradford?”

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Bradford out for the year already, haha. Poor Rams. They just can’t find a good QB who can stay on the field.[/quote]
The question is “is this it for Bradford?”[/quote]

Probably with the Rams. To bad I really wanted to see if the Rams could compete in that division.

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Bradford out for the year already, haha. Poor Rams. They just can’t find a good QB who can stay on the field.[/quote]
The question is “is this it for Bradford?”[/quote]

Probably with the Rams. To bad I really wanted to see if the Rams could compete in that division. [/quote]
Dude stays hurt though, has he had a full season?