Busto?

Busto?
Why dont Brunell/Bledsoe have a chance to be a bust? I would think most would agree that Favre is a better QB and what not and he had a chance to be mediocre.

It called learn from your mistakes.

Re: Busto?
Why dont Brunell/Bledsoe have a chance to be a bust? I would think most would agree that Favre is a better QB and what not and he had a chance to be mediocre. I agree with Opus. I have been meaning to go over a few players ratings with you Lord but my internet was down for most of the week. Any player has a chance of being a bust, just look at the can't miss prospect of Ryan Leaf. I think a 10% chance of 44/50 should be included in both these quarterbacks. Also hit me up as their were a couple other players I had questions about.

I always thought the league had guys who were solid players either way before the rolls. I mean if you look at about 5-7 DB's from last year draft we had guys who would be studs from the stat lines with any roll. Plus I would like to see teams/owners who did horrible get better with draft picks. Does not bother me either way just expressing my opinion.

"I mean if you look at about 5-7 DB's from last year draft we had guys who would be studs from the stat lines with any roll." This is just plain not true. Darren Perry for instance was the 4th or 5th DB selected and hit his 15% chance or whatever of 50/50/50. This was not terrible, but no means "stud". There have also been countless top 10 busts. Quarterback is a much more vital position to fill as well compared to DB. I understand wanting teams to get better, and I whole heartedly agree, but this is in fact not reality. There are always going to be busts in the top 10 and at the quarterback positon, ie, see Tim Couch, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, Akili Smith, Cade McCown, Joey Harrington etc. Also, even though I have been the victim of busts (3 times with top 10 picks), I kind of like the excitement and strategy it adds to the league. I just feel a small percentage (10 or even 5%), just adds to the excitement and anticipation of the draft, and makes it what it is.

I always thought the league had guys who were solid players either way before the rolls. I mean if you look at about 5-7 DB's from last year draft we had guys who would be studs from the stat lines with any roll. Plus I would like to see teams/owners who did horrible get better with draft picks. Does not bother me either way just expressing my opinion. I have no idea where you are getting 5-7 DBs would be studs with any roll. Almost every DB had a chance at rolling below 56 in the major categories of MS and INT.

Yeah, I fucked this up. Especially with Brunell. Guy was not even the starter on his college team. Normally I will look at the player's college career and pro career and try to find a happy medium. Bledsoe was #1 pick in pro draft, a great Heisman contender in college and had a very solid pro career. Brunell didn't play a great amount in college, was drafted 3rd or 4th round, and really didn't get a chance to play until the expansion draft (like Keenan McCardell from the 1991 draft). I'm going to lower his ratings somewhat. After all, whoever selects Brunell is going to have the opportunity to play him into improved stats which is the way it should be. Check the QB ratings again in about 10 min.

OK, I changed some things. For Bledsoe I threw in a 10% possibility of 50PS/44PC. With a 6 MS I would consider that majorly BUSTO! For Brunell I completely revamped his ratings. I kept the speed the same but lowered both PS and PC in every row. Also changed the percentages some to add a row with a possibility of 13MS/44PS/38PC (average backup). Once I thought about it, the guy Mark Brunell most resembled as a pro player (in his prime) was Steve Young and look at his ratings. Boomer, who I originally thought Brunell most resembled, was much more a pocket passer and did not derive his accuracy from his running speed as Brunell did. Let me know what you think.

I always thought the league had guys who were solid players either way before the rolls. I mean if you look at about 5-7 DB's from last year draft we had guys who would be studs from the stat lines with any roll. Plus I would like to see teams/owners who did horrible get better with draft picks. Does not bother me either way just expressing my opinion. I have no idea where you are getting 5-7 DBs would be studs with any roll. Almost every DB had a chance at rolling below 56 in the major categories of MS and INT.Well I meant to say solid player.

Lord that looks good for the changes you made!

View Full Version: Busto?