Thread: TMQ's 2007 mocking of mock drafts

very good read, i would love the pick couldnt get much better

"Zeus" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

TMQ's 2007 mocking of mock drafts
By Gregg Easterbrook
Special to Page 2

I hope people actually bother to read this.
Sometimes TMQ gets a little full of himself and his intellect, but he does have some great points about football, especially blitzing.
This is a nice one, too, concerning the upcoming draft:

Law of Quarterback Talent note: JaMarcus Russell totally outperformend Brady Quinn in their bowl meeting, leading conventional wisdom instantly to transfer the expected No. 1 crown from Quinn to Russell. Maybe Russell will be the better pro; I have no idea. (And, bear in mind, neither does anyone else.) But during the Sugar Bowl, I was counting "one-thousand one, one-thousand two, one-thousand three, one-thousand four" as Russell stood upright like a statute and calmly scanned the field for receivers. When Notre Dame snapped the ball, Quinn rarely had two seconds before he was hit or forced to scramble. All quarterbacks suddenly become more talented when the pass blocking is good! The LSU offensive line provided great pass blocking in the Sugar Bowl, while Quinn spent much of his final two collegiate contests, against USC and LSU, scrambling to his right. Suppose Russell finds himself at Oakland behind a gawd-awful line that last year surrendered 72 sacks, while Quinn lands with a team with good pass protection. Sports pundits may profess amazement that Quinn has suddenly become more talented while Russell has suddenly lost his talent!

=Z=

I agree....I have always liked Quinn better then Russel.....some people just don't look at the facts. How can any QB be successful behind a crappy line?

And, vice versa:
Can any QB perform well behind a dominant line??

pretty f'n funny stuff!!
Much of which is true

"Zeus" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

TMQ's 2007 mocking of mock drafts
By Gregg Easterbrook
Special to Page 2

I hope people actually bother to read this.
Sometimes TMQ gets a little full of himself and his intellect, but he does have some great points about football, especially blitzing.
This is a nice one, too, concerning the upcoming draft:

Law of Quarterback Talent note: JaMarcus Russell totally outperformend Brady Quinn in their bowl meeting, leading conventional wisdom instantly to transfer the expected No. 1 crown from Quinn to Russell. Maybe Russell will be the better pro; I have no idea. (And, bear in mind, neither does anyone else.) But during the Sugar Bowl, I was counting "one-thousand one, one-thousand two, one-thousand three, one-thousand four" as Russell stood upright like a statute and calmly scanned the field for receivers. When Notre Dame snapped the ball, Quinn rarely had two seconds before he was hit or forced to scramble. All quarterbacks suddenly become more talented when the pass blocking is good! The LSU offensive line provided great pass blocking in the Sugar Bowl, while Quinn spent much of his final two collegiate contests, against USC and LSU, scrambling to his right. Suppose Russell finds himself at Oakland behind a gawd-awful line that last year surrendered 72 sacks, while Quinn lands with a team with good pass protection. Sports pundits may profess amazement that Quinn has suddenly become more talented while Russell has suddenly lost his talent!

=Z=

Yes! That is what I have been arguing for the last 3 months, only he said it much better than I could.

I could not believe (actually I could) how many people jumped on the Russell bandwagon after the Sugar Bowl after Quinn had three years of being a top flight college quarterback.

"mountainviking" wrote:

And, vice versa:
Can any QB perform well behind a dominant line??

pretty f'n funny stuff!!
Much of which is true

I think that almost any QB in the league can play decently if they have a solid line....but I think there are still better QBs out there that can play at a higher lever behind a poor or solid O line. You can't give all the credit or blame to the O line or the QB alone.....besides the whole offense has to function well....every player plays an important part and if they don't play that part well then they can bring down the whole unit.

"Zeus" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

TMQ's 2007 mocking of mock drafts
By Gregg Easterbrook
Special to Page 2

I hope people actually bother to read this.
Sometimes TMQ gets a little full of himself and his intellect, but he does have some great points about football, especially blitzing.
This is a nice one, too, concerning the upcoming draft:

Law of Quarterback Talent note: JaMarcus Russell totally outperformend Brady Quinn in their bowl meeting, leading conventional wisdom instantly to transfer the expected No. 1 crown from Quinn to Russell. Maybe Russell will be the better pro; I have no idea. (And, bear in mind, neither does anyone else.) But during the Sugar Bowl, I was counting "one-thousand one, one-thousand two, one-thousand three, one-thousand four" as Russell stood upright like a statute and calmly scanned the field for receivers. When Notre Dame snapped the ball, Quinn rarely had two seconds before he was hit or forced to scramble. All quarterbacks suddenly become more talented when the pass blocking is good! The LSU offensive line provided great pass blocking in the Sugar Bowl, while Quinn spent much of his final two collegiate contests, against USC and LSU, scrambling to his right. Suppose Russell finds himself at Oakland behind a gawd-awful line that last year surrendered 72 sacks, while Quinn lands with a team with good pass protection. Sports pundits may profess amazement that Quinn has suddenly become more talented while Russell has suddenly lost his talent!

=Z=

Sometimes?! If I wanted to read 3,000 words of such self-praising pomp and circumstance I'd read one of my own graduate essays! I don't deny your point that he makes some good points sometimes, but he has as good a strike rate as anyone who types so much. I burned out on his columns after I read the words "Football Gods" for the zillionth time in 4 weeks. The fact that he totally neglects the times the "Football Gods" don't agree with his analysis and trumpets even the most minute details that reinforce his faith in the "Football Gods" only serves to annoy me further on the subject of the "Football Gods".

In fact, I found an old article TMQ from back when he wrote on NFL.com:

Gregg Easterbrook rambles: wrote:

Football Gods, Football Gods, Football Gods, why did the Patriots not go for it on 4th-and-2 at the Colts' 38 yard line, Football Gods, Football Gods, Maroon Zone, Football Gods, Football Gods, going for the tie and overtime instead of for the win, Football Gods, Football Gods.