DeyDurkie5;1584114 wrote:I don't give a shit if they aren't top 10 or not. With the exception of a few, they are all first round QBs. You barely find franchise qbs in later rounds. It's as simple as that. Why the fuck does it matter where we take a QB when we desperately need one? If it's with the first first rounder or the second first rounder, we need a QB. You are the delusional one if you don't think we need a QB. Also, I'll take solace in the fact that the people getting paid to scrutinize these players are calling 3 QBs in this draft very good prospects. I think, and I'm sure people on this site would agree, that if we don't get a QB in the first round, we are fucked.

But hey, take a LB with the first pick and let's see us skyrocket to the playoffs. You can fuck bitches, get money, and fry them fries while khalil mack leads us to the promised land. Word, dawg.

lhslep134;1584115 wrote:SE, say what you want about the Giants defense being ranked 17th that year, THEY were the reason they beat the Patriots and one of the best offenses ever.

se-alum;1584113 wrote:Patriots were 2nd. - 5th rounder
Steelers were 4th - #11th 1st round
Colts were 23rd - #1 overall, greatest QB in history
Giants were 17th - #1 overall
Steelers were 1st - #11 1st round
Saints defense was 20th - 2nd rounder
Packers defense was 2nd - #24 1st round
Giants defense was 25th - #1 overall
Ravens was 12th - #17 overall
Seattle was 1st - 3rd rounder

So basically, out of the last 10 Super Bowls 5 top 10 defenses have won Super Bowls, and 5 defenses outside of the top 10, including 4 that were outside the top 15, won Super Bowls. That's weird, would've sworn that all Super Bowls are won by top 5 defenses.

SportsAndLady;1584124 wrote:Funny thing is, sleeper isn't trolling. Dumbass actually believes what he's saying right now.

Lol but he fucks mad bitches.

sleeper;1584123 wrote:Don't see any top 10 QBs not taken #1 overall. Thanks for backing me up!

se-alum;1584122 wrote:So you think the 17th and 25th ranked defenses get the Giants into the playoffs without Eli Manning?

se-alum;1584127 wrote:Backing you up? It proves that you don't need a great defense to win the Super Bowl, making the "draft a LB @ #4" argument look even worse. Not to mention you say not to draft a QB until the 3rd round, when 70% of the winning QB's were drafted in the 1st round. Also, is #1 not considered part of the top 10? You said nobody should draft a QB in the top 10(which includes #1), because the Seahawks won the SB with a 3rd rounder...lol!

lhslep134;1584128 wrote:Yes dude. Manning was 40th in QB value in 2007 (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb2007). That defense carried them whether you want to admit it or not.

In 2011 Manning was much better, finishing 8th in value (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb2011). I'll give you that the defense didn't carry them in 2011 but it definitely did in 2007.

sleeper;1584132 wrote:Pretty hilarious that we are still arguing this when in reality Manziel and Bridgewater are nowhere near Peyton Manning like you all want him to believe. Even if they were, we just saw what happens when you put the BEST QB IN NFL HISTORY up against the best defense in the league. So unless you are willing to post FACTS AND REASON that Manziel is better than Peyton Manning, you have to immediately invalidate your argument.

I'll wait.

se-alum;1584136 wrote:Your defense claim has been reputed, nothing guarantees the best defense wins the Super Bowl. Funny how you want everyone else to post "FACTS AND REASON", when you refuse to use it yourself.

se-alum;1584133 wrote:Giants offense was 14th ranked. I'm guessing both needed the other to get into the playoffs, considering they were both average. Those "stats" are just as dumb as WAR in Baseball.

lhslep134;1584146 wrote:And LOL @ you just dismissing advanced stats as "dumb".

That backwards thinking is why it took so long for them to be embraced in the first place.

I'm not saying they tell the whole picture, but you can't just dismiss them because they paint a picture you disagree with.

sleeper;1584150 wrote:Alright guys. I know a QB is more important than a LB. Can we at least find some common ground here? Does anyone really think Manziel or Bridgewater is worth the #4 pick? I want a good QB too, I just don't see anything that makes me go "Yeah that guy will be better than Brandon Weeden!".

Dr. KnOiTaLL;1583889 wrote:Don't know if I really like it as much as some of the others, but what do you guys think of this digital reworking of the Browns uniform?



http://www.brobible.com/sports/article/32-nfl-teams-uniforms-redesigned/

sleeper;1584150 wrote:Alright guys. I know a QB is more important than a LB.

sleeper;1584150 wrote:I just don't see anything that makes me go "Yeah that guy will be better than Brandon Weeden!".

Mulva;1584189 wrote:So you haven't seen Brandon Weeden?

DeyDurkie5;1584191 wrote:LOL exactly. Johnny manziel beat SEC competition on a weekly basis. How the fuck is he not considered a better prospect than Weeden??

Ironman92;1584193 wrote:Tebow did too.