(01-16-2024, 01:22 PM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ] (01-16-2024, 12:17 PM)I am Yoda Wrote: [ -> ]Really? Three years in? Overreact much?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry to tell you that in year three is when quarterbacks actually do well. Lawrence was garbage
Mayfield had a very good year three...pretty much identical to Lawrence's year two.
Year four he threw 17 TDs and 13 Ints.
Year five he threw 10 TDs and 8 Ints.
Great numbers...LOL. Cleveland was so enamored with him they traded away multiple first round picks to get a quarterback that hadn't played in a year.
He's in year SIX now and you're ready to proclaim him better than Lawrence after three years.
(01-16-2024, 01:47 PM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ] (01-16-2024, 01:22 PM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry to tell you that in year three is when quarterbacks actually do well. Lawrence was garbage
He was average. There's elite, good, average and then garbage. Garbage is what Atlanta, Carolina, Arizona, Chicago and New York had in 2023.
Stop being such a drama queen.
It's just a weird hill to die on to me. People come here to share and at times argue their opinions. Although I disagree with the narrative that side paints, I completely understand there are scenarios where [BLEEP] goes off a cliff next year and they are "proven" right in the short term. I just will never understand the need to shoot down other peoples expressed optimism about the future on very subjective topics on a sport where an individual's statistics are influenced by 21 other people on the field on every play. Not that you can't reach conclusions off of football stats and make compelling arguments from them, it just takes more work (not all INTs are the same for instance) than that of other sports stats where there are fewer people affecting each play. Some are apparently ignorant of that, willfully or otherwise. Some even admit they think things will get better with an improved IOL next year, but go out of their way to shoot down any optimism they see. It may not be solely pessimism, but it's definitely not realism either. I guess some people are just pre-disposed to negativity and misery loves company as they say. Weird hill nonetheless.
(01-16-2024, 03:36 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: [ -> ] (01-16-2024, 01:47 PM)Caldrac Wrote: [ -> ]He was average. There's elite, good, average and then garbage. Garbage is what Atlanta, Carolina, Arizona, Chicago and New York had in 2023.
Stop being such a drama queen.
It's just a weird hill to die on to me. People come here to share and at times argue their opinions. Although I disagree with the narrative that side paints, I completely understand there are scenarios where [BLEEP] goes off a cliff next year and they are "proven" right in the short term. I just will never understand the need to shoot down other peoples expressed optimism about the future on very subjective topics on a sport where an individual's statistics are influenced by 21 other people on the field on every play. Not that you can't reach conclusions off of football stats and make compelling arguments from them, it just takes more work (not all INTs are the same for instance) than that of other sports stats where there are fewer people affecting each play. Some are apparently ignorant of that, willfully or otherwise. Some even admit they think things will get better with an improved IOL next year, but go out of their way to shoot down any optimism they see. It may not be solely pessimism, but it's definitely not realism either. I guess some people are just pre-disposed to negativity and misery loves company as they say. Weird hill nonetheless.
When kids get millions for playing a game...
Do I need to say more?
(01-21-2024, 01:19 AM)snarkyguy_he_him_his Wrote: [ -> ] (01-16-2024, 03:36 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: [ -> ]It's just a weird hill to die on to me. People come here to share and at times argue their opinions. Although I disagree with the narrative that side paints, I completely understand there are scenarios where [BLEEP] goes off a cliff next year and they are "proven" right in the short term. I just will never understand the need to shoot down other peoples expressed optimism about the future on very subjective topics on a sport where an individual's statistics are influenced by 21 other people on the field on every play. Not that you can't reach conclusions off of football stats and make compelling arguments from them, it just takes more work (not all INTs are the same for instance) than that of other sports stats where there are fewer people affecting each play. Some are apparently ignorant of that, willfully or otherwise. Some even admit they think things will get better with an improved IOL next year, but go out of their way to shoot down any optimism they see. It may not be solely pessimism, but it's definitely not realism either. I guess some people are just pre-disposed to negativity and misery loves company as they say. Weird hill nonetheless.
When kids get millions for playing a game...
Do I need to say more?
It would be great if you didnt actually.