Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Why? He's not a analyst nor a draft expert so why does he need to know these things to report?

If he does these things, I'll cut him some slack then. That said, even Morocco Brown and Scott Campbell had to get instruction/guidance from Mike in regards to the characteristics they looked at regarding their system. If a professional scout team couldn't do it, not sure I buy that Clayton can either. Not unless they've broken it down to him.

Perhaps you should study what real reporters actually do with their days.

Of course he needs to try to know such things if he is to be a good reporter.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Perhaps you should study what real reporters actually do with their days.

Of course he needs to try to know such things if he is to be a good reporter.

I gathered he didn't just sit around in some office scanning forums/twitter/fax/email/phone for news alerts. If he's that knowledgeable, why don't they use him as a analyst?


SO why is I've heard that NFL scouts say that guys like Mel Kiper and Todd McShay don't know shit?

"Most people at my level feel he is a joke," a veteran NFL scout told us via e-mail. "People in the league respect Kiper. He is not a true scout but he does work at it. A lot of his info he gets from connections in the league, and over the years he has made quite a few. When he was younger he used to burn some bridges. He doesn't do that any more."

So what about McShay?

"McShay does not have any good connections," the source opined. "Higher-ups in the league think he is an arrogant asshole. A know-it-all. And he really knows nothing. Whatever he says about a quarterback, take it to the bank, it will be the opposite. Remember, last August he stated that Jevan Snead was better thanColt McCoy and would get drafted in the top five. He has yet to publicly retract that statement.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I gathered he didn't just sit around in some office scanning forums/twitter/fax/email/phone for news alerts. If he's that knowledgeable, why don't they use him as a analyst?


SO why is I've heard that NFL scouts say that guys like Mel Kiper and Todd McShay don't know shit?

Nobody said that folks like Clayton know everything. If people like him did, they'd be GM's, not TV reporters.

But, on the other hand, they still put out a lot of effort, so just dismissing them is as disrespectful as it is foolish.

And economics dictate that there can only be so many analysts and so many reporters.

[NC_Skins]

You can go back to ES any day now. Thanks in advance.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

You can go back to ES any day now. Thanks in advance.

Ouch!?

[skinsfaninok]

I actually like john Clayton

[SmootSmack]

Clayton's opinion isn't random. But whatever, this isn't a thread about Clayton

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Clayton's opinion isn't random. But whatever, this isn't a thread about Clayton

I'd rather talk about Clayton at this point than quarterbacks.

[That Guy]

RGIII, If I knew manning was 100% it'd be different, but I've never heard so much FUD in my life.

[biffle]

'50% of 1st round QBs succeed' is a statistic.

Using that to say 'Griffin has a 50% chance of success' is a terrible use of that statistic. And using it as a basis for draft decisions even more so.

I tried to show you examples to illustrate that, but it seemed pretty clear you weren't going to listen regardless so I gave up.

[NC_Skins]

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by biffle

'50% of 1st round QBs succeed' is a statistic.

Using that to say 'Griffin has a 50% chance of success' is a terrible use of that statistic. And using it as a basis for draft decisions even more so.

I tried to show you examples to illustrate that, but it seemed pretty clear you weren't going to listen regardless so I gave up.

Point taken, but define "succeed"?

Did Jason Campbell succeed? Did Carson Palmer? Did Vince Young? Did Chad Pennington? Is Mark Sanchez succeeding?

Looking at 1st round QBs over history, you've got plenty of guys who flopped, call it 50%. And you have plenty of guys who stuck around as QBs and performed well, but were never able to win anything. What you have very, very few of is stars.

And Manning is a STAR. The biggest.

Do you want to sign up for a guy who gets us to a few division titles and the divisional round of the playoffs? Maybe Griffin is more of a lock than other QB prospects, but you have to acknowledge the likelihood.

And I ask you, what's more likely. That Manning will never be himself again, or that Griffin will not become a stud?

[biffle]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Point taken, but define "succeed"?

Did Jason Campbell succeed? Did Carson Palmer? Did Vince Young? Did Chad Pennington? Is Mark Sanchez succeeding?

Looking at 1st round QBs over history, you've got plenty of guys who flopped, call it 50%. And you have plenty of guys who stuck around as QBs and performed well, but were never able to win anything. What you have very, very few of is stars.

And Manning is a STAR. The biggest.

Do you want to sign up for a guy who gets us to a few division titles and the divisional round of the playoffs? Maybe Griffin is more of a lock than other QB prospects, but you have to acknowledge the likelihood.

And I ask you, what's more likely. That Manning will never be himself again, or that Griffin will not become a stud?

Some of those questions you'll have to ask of people who want to use that 50% success number. I don't, so I'm not going to spend any time breaking down the particulars of something I think is basically worthless.

Manning certainly was great. Will he be again? Who knows. And who knows if the odds of that are better than of Griffin being great in the pros. But are you even discussing the Manning of now? Because even in 2010 Manning was still very good, but that performance might not get him into the Pro Bowl in the NFC right now. And do we think he's going to be better now than he was then, after a year off and in a new environment?

All of which is irrelevant to my thinking, because I think Manning, even if totally healthy, provides such a small window to win, and one in which he is likely to decline as the team is able to build around him. It's not a recipe for success, imo.

And no, division titles aren't worth much to me. The goal should be Super Bowls, and the team should be building towards them. Which is not the likely path I see with Peyton Manning.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by biffle

All of which is irrelevant to my thinking, because I think Manning, even if totally healthy, provides such a small window to win, and one in which he is likely to decline as the team is able to build around him. It's not a recipe for success, imo.

And no, division titles aren't worth much to me. The goal should be Super Bowls, and the team should be building towards them. Which is not the likely path I see with Peyton Manning.

Signing Peyton Manning reduces the current urgency to find a QB of the future through the use of a 1st round or early round draft picks.
Those early round draft picks can then be used for team building.
Areas like of team like OL, DL, DBs, WRs etc.
It also affords the luxury of developing/grooming a mid-round QB of the future the old fashioned way.
And of course the option to draft the next Robert Griffin in 2014 or 2015 will still be there.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Signing Peyton Manning reduces the current urgency to find a QB of the future through the use of a 1st round or early round draft picks.
Those early round draft picks can then be used for team building.
Areas like of team like OL, DL, DBs, WRs etc.

He'll also use up an awful lot of cap room which could be used towards the same team building.

Originally Posted by 30gut

It also affords the luxury of developing/grooming a mid-round QB of the future the old fashioned way.

And if we want to use those supposed odds you used earlier, the above plan has a success rate of, what, 5%?

Originally Posted by 30gut

And of course the option to draft the next Robert Griffin in 2014 or 2015 will still be there.

And he'll win us enough games that we'll be nowhere near the pick you would need to get the next Griffin, meaning it would cost much more than it would now, assuming we even lucked into another situation of a QB as good as Griffin being available and the team holding the pick having no need for a QB.