Johnny Manziel Loves Football...and Coke

[Bigappleyinzer]

You seem to be having issues wrapping your head around this. Nowhere in this conversation is anybody talking about a #3 RB vs. a 1st round QB. Nobody... but somehow you want to interpose that into this conversation. That is NOT the issue.

So I'm going to assume you couldn't find any Qbs that were knocked out of playing football from an injury. RG III is healthy now and will play this year. All players play with injuries.

Vick was hurt RUNNING the football not just getting hit in the pocket... what was it again that Archer does with the ball? Vick relied on his 4.33 time and he got destroyed. So how is Archer going to be any different when Vick is 4 inches taller and 42 lbs heavier? Oh that's right, Archer isn't going to play much. Not sure I've ever heard of a player being defended by the argument "He isn't playing much".

Bro, you are the one attempting to make the comparison. This is a thread dedicated to the tomfoolery of Johnny, but you found a way to insert Archer in the discussion. Most of us wouldnt even think to bring up a WR/RB in a thread about a QB- but kudos to your efforts.

Also, how many players in total get 'knocked out of football'?! Instead of using your hyperbole, I would say that most players who are forced to leave the game struggle with numerous injuries over time, not due to one prohibitive 'tackle'... That being said- would you agree that there are plenty of QB's that have struggled with injuries that have had their careers cut short or unrealized?

In fact, both Vick and RGIII have been hurt IN THE POCKET due to scrambling, doing the same thing as Johnny boy.

 

[Vader]

Bro, you are the one attempting to make the comparison. This is a thread dedicated to the tomfoolery of Johnny, but you found a way to insert Archer in the discussion. Most of us wouldnt even think to bring up a WR/RB in a thread about a QB- but kudos to your efforts.

Also, how many players in total get 'knocked out of football'?! Instead of using your hyperbole, I would say that most players who are forced to leave the game struggle with numerous injuries over time, not due to one prohibitive 'tackle'... That being said- would you agree that there are plenty of QB's that have struggled with injuries that have had their careers cut short or unrealized?

In fact, both Vick and RGIII have been hurt IN THE POCKET due to scrambling, doing the same thing as Johnny boy.

I'm making a physical comparison NOT a position comparison. Sorry if you can't see the different.

Also AGAIN, RBs last NO time in the NFL. QBs are protected more than any other position on the entire football field. You can't even name ONE QB that was injury riddled and have to stop playing before 30 years old. I can think of one RB on the Steelers over the past few seasons. So your position theory is seriously flawed. Troy Aikman left because of concussions but he played 12 YEARS. Sorry but you're just wrong. RBs take a ton of hits and are hurt all the time. QBs aren't hit as often and are extremely protected in today's NFL.

And AGAIN, RG III was hurt RUNNING THE FOOTBALL. Not scrambling but RUNNING. Here it is:



Vick has been hurt many times running with the football as well.

 

[tdub88]

It's not a dollar, it's a hundy and he's rolling it up because it fits up Bigapple's **** better that way..........

 

[Bigappleyinzer]

It's not a dollar, it's a hundy and he's rolling it up because it fits up Bigapple's **** better that way..........

 

[SteelerAl]

If Archer was drafted by the Browns with the 97th pick, I wouldn't be laughing at them because they took a small player. I would be wondering how many special teams TDs he was going to score against our coverage units.

Personally I look at Archer as a specialist player - not a true running back who is going to endure the pounding that goes with that position - so I don't see the argument that he's bound to wear down because he is a small running back. He is a small kickoff and punt returner who will be used occasionally on offense, mostly in space, and may eventually attend WR meetings full time.

And, yes, Johnny is going to get hurt because he plays like Ben but is much smaller. But if his O-line is better than the one Ben has been behind for most of his career, his size / injuries won't be the reason he sucks in the NFL.

 

[Vader]

If Archer was drafted by the Browns with the 97th pick, I wouldn't be laughing at them because they took a small player. I would be wondering how many special teams TDs he was going to score against our coverage units.

Personally I look at Archer as a specialist player - not a true running back who is going to endure the pounding that goes with that position - so I don't see the argument that he's bound to wear down because he is a small running back. He is a small kickoff and punt returner who will be used occasionally on offense, mostly in space, and may eventually attend WR meetings full time.

And, yes, Johnny is going to get hurt because he plays like Ben but is much smaller. But if his O-line is better than the one Ben has been behind for most of his career, his size / injuries won't be the reason he sucks in the NFL.

You'd be one of the few who wouldn't laugh. Most on here, as shown by this thread, would talk about how small he was and how long he will last against the big boys. They'd also laugh about him being a part time player. Especially if the clowns already had 2 very good RBs, just signed a FA slot WR and had one of the best returners in the league at WR in Brown.

I don't like Johnnie at all. He may get hurt. I have no idea. But again it goes back to the idea that small players are vulnerable to injuries... oh unless it is our small player.. then he won't get hurt because he isn't going to play much. That's a problem. Drafting a player that might touch the ball 4-5 times a game (IF he can field punts and do all the KO duty) is shortsighted IMHO. I would rather draft someone that at least has the opportunity to start at 97, especially in a deep draft.

 

[t-man]

I grasp it just fine (that's what she said). And I'm glad you are honest enough to admit that you like Archer simply because he is on the Steelers. That is something most on here can't do. I want him to do well and be a great player. But that doesn't taint my assessment of him as a player. The problem on here is that many assess him differently solely because he was drafted by the Steelers. Any other team that drafted him would be ridiculed.

Well, yeah, obviously I like him just because the steelers drafted him. I mean, ****, he hasn't played f a ******* down on NFL football yet, for me to come out and say **** him, he's going to suck, that would be kind of stupid at this point. I have ZERO knowledge of how he will do at this level, just like every ******* other rookie, that's why first ******* rounders often bust, and you have some ************ like Tom ******* Brady going to multiple SuperBowls, because no ******* matter how much all these ******* draftnicks suck one anothers ******* cocks in the weeks between now and training camp, no one ******* knows for sure. So, yeah, since I'm a Steeler fan, and I know Tom ******* Brady was picked WAY the hell after a LOT of other guys, I'll hope every ************* year that our guy is THAT ******* guy. And you know what, once those ******* draftnicks stop missing on about 25% of the top ******* picks in EVERY ************* ROUND, MAYBE I'll start to believe all that **** I see printed before the ******* guy plays a down in the ******* NFL. Till then, all that ******* ink is just wasted. We'll see what we will see when the season kicks off, and after the games are played this year, I'll make soemwhat of an assessment of how valuable that pick was.

Joe

 

[insaniti]

I grasp it just fine (that's what she said). And I'm glad you are honest enough to admit that you like Archer simply because he is on the Steelers. That is something most on here can't do. I want him to do well and be a great player. But that doesn't taint my assessment of him as a player. The problem on here is that many assess him differently solely because he was drafted by the Steelers. Any other team that drafted him would be ridiculed.

I agree to a point. Some people are just very selective of who they want to throw praise at while ignoring the facts. I think with Archer it's because he was an unexpected pick. But take Jarvis Jones for example, he's still getting beat down even tho the Steelers drafted him (SOME of it is warranted). The only status quo here at Steelernation is the doom and gloom during every game/draft thread. Other than that, it's really anybodies guess what will or won't be talked about.

 

[Vader]

I agree to a point. Some people are just very selective of who they want to throw praise at while ignoring the facts. I think with Archer it's because he was an unexpected pick. But take Jarvis Jones for example, he's still getting beat down even tho the Steelers drafted him (SOME of it is warranted). The only status quo here at Steelernation is the doom and gloom during every game/draft thread. Other than that, it's really anybodies guess what will or won't be talked about.

You're always going to have the doom and gloom posters along with the rah rah circle jerk crowd. On the old board people were talking about Jones as the next Harrison or Derrick Brooks. My issue is that most of those people didn't really know anything about Jones. They'd never seen him play a snap at Georgia. They knew nothing about his USC health issues. The only reason they loved him was because the Steelers drafted him. After they liked the pick because the STeelers drafted him then they find high light videos and jump on those. Which is why I always respected those like TMC, Dobre and Del who at least knew who the guy was before the draft. Even if I didn't always agree.

 

[insaniti]

I guess I just flat out missed those posts. I only remember the "we just wasted our first round pick again" posts.

 

[Vader]

I guess I just flat out missed those posts. I only remember the "we just wasted our first round pick again" posts.

Sorry you missed them. They were epic. I can't believe you missed the "Damn he is quick" or the "He's going to be a beast when he gets a little bigger and stronger". They were all over the old board.

 

[Litos]

Sorry you missed them. They were epic. I can't believe you missed the "Damn he is quick" or the "He's going to be a beast when he gets a little bigger and stronger". They were all over the old board.

Can't agree, more than half of the board were dissapointed with the pick, including me. I remember my words following the draft live, they were "oh ****"

 

[Vader]

Can't agree, more than half of the board were dissapointed with the pick, including me. I remember my words following the draft live, they were "oh ****"

So that means the other half of the board loved the pick.... That half posted rave reviews about Jones.

 

[deljzc]

Don't the so-called "pessimist fans" have more a bit more legs to stand on than the "optimistic fans" after two under-achieving 8-8 seasons?

I mean, I don't really think I'm pessimistic or optimistic, but I just go by what the numbers tell me. The recent history of this franchise isn't rosy enough for me to be "rah, rah" over every move they make.

In fact, the philosophical change to go smaller at LB and try to find small, return specialists hasn't exactly worked so well for me to think they've discovered a new secret. I mean I watched Stephon Logan and Chris Rainey in the Tomlin regime so shouldn't I be somewhat skeptical of Archer?

I have watched some of Timmon's struggles as a young, undersized LB and I've watched them draft Worilds, Jones, Williams, et.al as LB only prospects (not the old DE converts) with some mixed success. Shouldn't I be skeptical of Shazier?

I'll fully admit, I now give the benefit of the doubt to Tombert on WR picks. I've long been concerned with the lack of height, but for the most part, they draft at least NFL quality guys. So you won't hear me ***** about Wheaton, Bryant, J. Brown, Clemons right off the bat even if my board didn't agree at the time.

Isn't that what educated fans do? Use the past to judge the future? Be honest about performances in as neutral a way as possible? Try to read independent evaluation site/opinions to mix into your own?

 

[SteelerAl]

Isn't that what educated fans do? Use the past to judge the future? Be honest about performances in as neutral a way as possible? Try to read independent evaluation site/opinions to mix into your own?

Not necessarily. There are many ways to be a fan. Some love fantasy football, some think it's the biggest waste of time on Earth. Some love mock drafts, some say "I'll go ahead and learn about the players we pick when the draft's over." Not everyone has the time or inclination to study 200 college prospects, out of whom only 7 or 8 are going to become Steelers. Not everyone is obsessed with comparing Tombert's track record with his or her own record of hypothetical decisions. It doesn't necessarily make one type of fan "educated" and the other not.

It's pretty funny that you use the word "neutral" which kind of goes against the entire concept of being a fan, doesn't it? You really seem to have a hard time understanding that not everyone in the world thinks exactly like you do. That's the thing about guys like you and TMC. You can't see the forest for the trees because you get so lost in the fantasy that you are actually the Steelers GM.

 

[Vader]

Don't the so-called "pessimist fans" have more a bit more legs to stand on than the "optimistic fans" after two under-achieving 8-8 seasons?

I mean, I don't really think I'm pessimistic or optimistic, but I just go by what the numbers tell me. The recent history of this franchise isn't rosy enough for me to be "rah, rah" over every move they make.

In fact, the philosophical change to go smaller at LB and try to find small, return specialists hasn't exactly worked so well for me to think they've discovered a new secret. I mean I watched Stephon Logan and Chris Rainey in the Tomlin regime so shouldn't I be somewhat skeptical of Archer?

I have watched some of Timmon's struggles as a young, undersized LB and I've watched them draft Worilds, Jones, Williams, et.al as LB only prospects (not the old DE converts) with some mixed success. Shouldn't I be skeptical of Shazier?

I'll fully admit, I now give the benefit of the doubt to Tombert on WR picks. I've long been concerned with the lack of height, but for the most part, they draft at least NFL quality guys. So you won't hear me ***** about Wheaton, Bryant, J. Brown, Clemons right off the bat even if my board didn't agree at the time.

Isn't that what educated fans do? Use the past to judge the future? Be honest about performances in as neutral a way as possible? Try to read independent evaluation site/opinions to mix into your own?

Exactly right. The difference is that many on here don't even know who these players are before the draft. They love the pick simply because the Steelers picked them. Even some of those that know the players change their opinion of them simply because the Steelers drafted them. Seriously, how many times over the years have people here blasted the Raiders for drafting 40 times? Then when the Steelers do it "WOW he is fast!!!". Yea, I know some will argue that Archer isn't just a 40 time... but if that were true then would any of them draft him if he ran a 4.6? Hell no. He was drafted because of his 40 time period. Which use to be a huge no no on this board. But now it's a great thing to do.

I don't really have an issue with the move to faster LBs. I didn't like the Jones pick because he isn't fast, has health issues and will be 25 years old this year. The only reason he was there to draft was because he ran so slow at his pro-day. I actually like Shazier and think he'll do well inside. I liked the Spence pick as well. But both of those guys are actually fast, unlike Jones.

 

[SteelerAl]

So that means the other half of the board loved the pick.... That half posted rave reviews about Jones.

You are so obsessed with attacking the "rah, rah" posters that you have no concept of the reality when it comes to this board. The vast majority of posters that have been around for awhile had concerns about the Jones pick. Sure a couple teenagers were excited about the pick and projecting ROY for Jones, but they got run off the board in a hurry as always happens around here.

 

[Vader]

You are so obsessed with attacking the "rah, rah" posters that you have no concept of the reality when it comes to this board. The vast majority of posters that have been around for awhile had concerns about the Jones pick. Sure a couple teenagers were excited about the pick and projecting ROY for Jones, but they got run off the board in a hurry as always happens around here.

And you are obsessed with the nay sayers that you can't even remember TMC and others fighting for months over the pick... I wonder who he was arguing with? A few teenagers? NOPE.. many that are still on this board. I'm pretty sure Bermuda, superman and ant all argued the pick was great. But yea, they are just some teenagers who came to the board for a few weeks... right...

 

[deljzc]

Not necessarily. There are many ways to be a fan. Some love fantasy football, some think it's the biggest waste of time on Earth. Some love mock drafts, some say "I'll go ahead and learn about the players we pick when the draft's over." Not everyone has the time or inclination to study 200 college prospects, out of whom only 7 or 8 are going to become Steelers. Not everyone is obsessed with comparing Tombert's track record with his or her own record of hypothetical decisions. It doesn't necessarily make one type of fan "educated" and the other not.

It's pretty funny that you use the word "neutral" which kind of goes against the entire concept of being a fan, doesn't it? You really seem to have a hard time understanding that not everyone in the world thinks exactly like you do. That's the thing about guys like you and TMC. You can't see the forest for the trees because you get so lost in the fantasy that you are actually the Steelers GM.

How is being neutral and unbiased being less of a fan?

Shouldn't I make every decision in my life in a neutral, intelligent and unbiased way? Shouldn't I vote that way? Shouldn't I raise my kids that way?

Bias is one of the worse things a fan can do. It makes you look stupid, lacking knowledge and ignorant of facts.

If you think that is an "acceptable" way to be a fan, go right ahead. You're leading the pack really well.

 

[SteelerAl]

How is being neutral and unbiased being less of a fan?

Shouldn't I make every decision in my life in a neutral, intelligent and unbiased way? Shouldn't I vote that way? Shouldn't I raise my kids that way?

Bias is one of the worse things a fan can do. It makes you look stupid, lacking knowledge and ignorant of facts.

If you think that is an "acceptable" way to be a fan, go right ahead. You're leading the pack really well.

Again you demonstrate that your head is pretty damn far up your ***. How the **** is rooting for a football team analogous to raising children? If that fact that you made that comparison doesn't show you that you take this **** way too seriously, I don't know what else to say.

 

[deljzc]

Again you demonstrate that your head is pretty damn far up your ***. How the **** is rooting for a football team analogous to raising children? If that fact that you made that comparison doesn't show you that you take this **** way too seriously, I don't know what else to say.

Use whatever example you want. I don't care.

The bottom line is stupid is as stupid does. You can be a dumb fan or a smart fan. Both are technically "fans". I just choose to be a smart fan, know as much as I can and not be bias (both for and against).

It's not that hard really. You don't need 100's of hours. You just have to have an open mind and LISTEN.

Stupidity is basically the lack of ability to read, listen and retain information for re-use in decisions in a logical and meaningful way. Dumb fans don't listen, they don't read and they don't retain information. Then they don't use, don't have or ignore that information when they make decisions (speak or write) about the Steelers.

That's LIFE. You either act stupid or you don't and I contend if you so easily act stupid about who you rout for as a football team, you are likewise easily influenced to act stupid in other aspects of your life as well (some, I agree, a lot more important).

 

[Black & Gold Bleeder]

How is being neutral and unbiased being less of a fan?

Shouldn't I make every decision in my life in a neutral, intelligent and unbiased way? Shouldn't I vote that way? Shouldn't I raise my kids that way?

Bias is one of the worse things a fan can do. It makes you look stupid, lacking knowledge and ignorant of facts.

If you think that is an "acceptable" way to be a fan, go right ahead. You're leading the pack really well.

I think you are really trying to compare making emotional decisions vs intelligent decisions.

Steelers do no wrong = emotional

vader picks arguments and is never wrong = intelligent.. See the difference?

 

[antdrewjosh]

And you are obsessed with the nay sayers that you can't even remember TMC and others fighting for months over the pick... I wonder who he was arguing with? A few teenagers? NOPE.. many that are still on this board. I'm pretty sure Bermuda, superman and ant all argued the pick was great. But yea, they are just some teenagers who came to the board for a few weeks... right...

And im pretty sure you are wrong. I didnt say much about Jones except I was happy we took him over Eifert because i felt we needed a pass rusher. I didnt have any predictions for how he would do. The player i wanted from that draft was Ansah.

I do find it funny how you can so easily predict who doesnt watch college football. I have two teenage boys in my house one of whom is on his way to college to play football. College football is always on in my house. I see tons of players.

Most posters you claim are Rah rah over Archer are not. Most took exception to the so called draft experts being all bent out of shape and saying he has no ******* chance of making it in the league. Or my issue with you for saying the Steelers took him strictly because he ran fast and had no plan or idea on how to utilize him. No one was calling him a superstar. I see some tgings he can do that will justify him being picked in the third round. But there were those calling him a bust moments after the pick.

If the Browns took him I wouldnt be laughing and calling him a bust I'd be worried about him doing the same things I expect him to attempt to do for us.

 

[Vader]

And im pretty sure you are wrong. I didnt say much about Jones except I was happy we took him over Eifert because i felt we needed a pass rusher. I didnt have any predictions for how he would do. The player i wanted from that draft was Ansah.

I do find it funny how you can so easily predict who doesnt watch college football. I have two teenage boys in my house one of whom is on his way to college to play football. College football is always on in my house. I see tons of players.

Most posters you claim are Rah rah over Archer are not. Most took exception to the so called draft experts being all bent out of shape and saying he has no ******* chance of making it in the league. Or my issue with you for saying the Steelers took him strictly because he ran fast and had no plan or idea on how to utilize him. No one was calling him a superstar. I see some tgings he can do that will justify him being picked in the third round. But there were those calling him a bust moments after the pick.

If the Browns took him I wouldnt be laughing and calling him a bust I'd be worried about him doing the same things I expect him to attempt to do for us.

I remember TMC and many on this board arguing over the draft pick. To say it was some kids for a short time is like the IRS saying it was 2 rogue agents in Ohio who did all the illegal activity. It's bullshit. MANY people on here loved the Jones pick. TMC was arguing with long time posters on this not a couple of kids.

Also I never said you didn't watch college football. I know some don't because THEY SAID SO. But I guess you know more than the ones that admit they don't watch it?

Just like many in the Archer thread who said that he would be a good player. It wasn't just "exceptions" to those meanies who thought Archer wouldn't make it. MANY people loved the pick. They talked about how fast he was, his great return ability and his exception vision. But I guess you missed that as well?

Damn you people have a very limited memory. All you can remember is the strawmen you set up and nothing beyond that.

 

[SteelerAl]

The difference is that many on here don't even know who these players are before the draft. They love the pick simply because the Steelers picked them. Even some of those that know the players change their opinion of them simply because the Steelers drafted them. Seriously, how many times over the years have people here blasted the Raiders for drafting 40 times? Then when the Steelers do it "WOW he is fast!!!". Yea, I know some will argue that Archer isn't just a 40 time... but if that were true then would any of them draft him if he ran a 4.6? Hell no. He was drafted because of his 40 time period. Which use to be a huge no no on this board. But now it's a great thing to do.

It's funny when the Raiders use the #7 pick on a lousy football player just because he is fast. That is in no way similar to us drafting Archer at #97.