BCS RANKINGS OUT!!!!

[JDawg1536]

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

Originally posted by: JDawg1536

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

Purdue did not even win the Big 10 that year as they did not play in a BCS bowl game at all. Purdue was not even ranked until AFTER beating KSU in January. Do some research on stuff before you post things you apparently know nothing about (which seems to be a lot at this time).

Your point: Purdue was not a top 25 team when the played KSU.

Counter point: They won 9 games, and ended the season in the top 25. Why would their ranking before the game matter? When it was all said and done, was Purdue not a top 25 team?

When Deshaun Foster was tearing it up at UCLA, Alabama was ranked #3 and came out to Pasadena to open the season. UCLA kicked the shit out of Bama, and every Bruin fan was stoked about the season. Turns out Bama went on to win three games all year (all 3 against SEC opponents), and UCLA went on to a 6-6 record. When the 2000 season was all said and done, it turns out that Alabama wasn't shit. Just as it turned out in 1998 that Purdue was a good team.

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

You comparing Drew Brees in college to Drew Brees in the pros at this time is a total joke. If he was great in college he wouldn't have lasted to the second round (pick one) that year. It appears only one QB was taken ahead of him, Vick, but every team passed on him after the #1 pick and fell to San Diego in the 2nd round.

Ok, this right here is all that is needed to prove your complete ignorance.

Your Point: "If he was great in college he wouldn't have lasted to the second round". You are saying that Drew Brees was not that great.

My Counterpoint: Holy shit, are you serious? The guy owns all the Big Ten passing records. He was on the top ten list of the NCAA's all-time passing leaders. He finished in the top five for the Heisman.... TWICE! He won the fricken Maxwell award! That means he was voted by the media and coaches as THE BEST player in all of football. You are unbelievable.

And where a player is drafted is irrelevant to their college performance. Tim Tebow might have two Heisman Trophys and three national championships by the time he is done, and he won't get drafted in the first three rounds. Chris Weinke beat Brees out for the Heisman in 2000, and he went in the fourth round. Did you ever think that maybe, just maybe, he was passed up because he is not even 6ft tall?

Originally posted by: Adrenaline


Until you can come up with a plausible point-counterpoint discussion I will not bother replying to any more garbage you post. You obviously have no idea about college football. Keep pretending you do. Your Drew Brees point just nailed it on that.

I gave you my "counterpoints" to your "points", if that's what those things you wrote are. I played college football for a year. Very good friends of mine played all over the Pac 10 and a couple in the SEC. Four of my friends played in the NFL, 3 of them still do, and two of them are starters. I've played the game, played it with and against some elite talent, and will be around it for the rest of my life.

For you to say that MY point on Drew Brees proves I know nothing about football is about the most outrageous thing I've ever heard in my life.

/yawn

Brees did not even start his rookie year from what I read from one place, will not bother looking it up elsewhere. He was good in college (team was "ok" the year in question), but has become phenomenal in the NFL. Point is you seem to be equating Brees in college to Brees in the pros now and he is far far far better now than he was in college. I am a Brees fan and always have been. I am well aware of what he did in college. I will stop bothering with you as you are not worth it. Keep trying to prove points now but you still know nothing. Played college football for one year and not know much about it, wow what a disappointment.

Anyone else have something important to start a discussion about that may actually know something?

Edit:

I skimmed your post, but Tebow not getting drafted in the first 3 rounds we shall see. You're saying Tebow won't go on the first day then. Have fun.

Ok, well as a last reply answer me these questions really quickly.

How is a guy who finished 3rd and 4th in Heisman voting playing on an "ok" team and was a Maxwell Award winner as THE BEST player in college football just "good"?

Who was better than Brees from 1998-2000?

What does "not even starting his rookie year" have to do with anything?
Rookie starters- Vince Young, Jake Plummer, Kerry Collins, Cade McNown, Drew Bledsoe, Ken Dorsey....
Rookies who didn't start- Joe Montana, Brett Favre, Bart Starr, Johnny Unitis, Drew Brees...
Again, can you help me with the relevance factor? He was drafted onto a team with Doug Flutie starting at QB. A starting quarterback who was a pro bowler, and, oddly enough, ALSO WON THE MAXWELL AWARD AS THE BEST COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYER.

Are you really trying to say that since I think Drew Brees was a great (not good) college quarterback that I know nothing about football? If Drew Brees was just four inches taller, he very well could have been the #1 pick in the draft. As it is, going #32 as a QB who doesn't even stand six feet tall says enough.

If you can find anyone on this planet who honestly agrees with you, I will send you $100.

 

[Adrenaline]

Originally posted by: JDawg1536

Who was better than Brees from 1998-2000?

What does "not even starting his rookie year" have to do with anything?
Rookie starters- Vince Young, Jake Plummer, Kerry Collins, Cade McNown, Drew Bledsoe, Ken Dorsey....
Rookies who didn't start- Joe Montana, Brett Favre, Bart Starr, Johnny Unitis, Drew Brees...
Again, can you help me with the relevance factor? He was drafted onto a team with Doug Flutie starting at QB. A starting quarterback who was a pro bowler, and, oddly enough, ALSO WON THE MAXWELL AWARD AS THE BEST COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYER.

Are you really trying to say that since I think Drew Brees was a great (not good) college quarterback that I know nothing about football? If Drew Brees was just four inches taller, he very well could have been the #1 pick in the draft. As it is, going #32 as a QB who doesn't even stand six feet tall says enough.

If you can find anyone on this planet who honestly agrees with you, I will send you $100.

Yet again, no research. Heisman voters thought other QBs were better than Brees those years, still a good college QB nonetheless. If he was completely and totally awesome he would have started at least some his rookie year, playing behind Flutie wasn't a bad deal. Flutie was a Pro Bowler in 1998 and did not have a great year in 2001 which would be Brees rookie year. The stats are all within that link. Flutie has 15 TDs and 18 INTs Brees rookie year, yet he did not start a single game? Just odd is all.

Brees was a good (when they beat KSU, that year going 9-4 and learning the ropes basically) college player that got even better (the next year and on), I can say that, but he was nowhere near what he has become today. He is phenomenal today and I would say easily the third best QB in the NFL right now. If he was taller he still would not have been drafted ahead of Vick in the draft, sorry. Other teams that could have used a QB passed on him. As is apparent from heisman voting that college QBs with great stats doesn't translate into good NFL play all the time.

I won't bother with the other QBs listed. Have a good night.

 

[JDawg1536]

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

Yet again, no research. Heisman voters thought other QBs were better than Brees those years, still a good college QB nonetheless. If he was completely and totally awesome he would have started at least some his rookie year, playing behind Flutie wasn't a bad deal. Flutie was a Pro Bowler in 1998 and did not have a great year in 2001 which would be Brees rookie year. The stats are all within that link. Flutie has 15 TDs and 18 INTs Brees rookie year, yet he did not start a single game? Just odd is all.

Brees was a good (when they beat KSU) college player that got even better (the next year and on), I can say that, but he was nowhere near what he has become today. He is phenomenal today and I would say easily the third best QB in the NFL right now. If he was taller he still would not have been drafted ahead of Vick in the draft, sorry. Other teams that could have used a QB passed on him. As is apparent from heisman voting that college QBs with great stats doesn't translate into good NFL play all the time.

I won't bother with the other QBs listed. Have a good night.

Heupel and Weinke were the quarterbacks for the #1 and #2 teams in the country. The Heisman has only gone to a player who wasn't on a top 10 team twice in the last 20 years. Those went to college football's all time leading rusher (Williams) and all time leading passer (Detmer), even though Rocket Ismail should have won it in 1990. The other QBs were also very good, but to use Heisman voting as a measuring stick to determine who the better player is fails.

To say he is much better now than he was in college is retarded. No duh. Can you show me a nine year NFL veteran who is worse than he was in college? That being said, his stats in the NFL are very comparable to his stats from college. He averages a little less than a foot longer per attempt, has about a 2.5% higher completion percentage, throws for about 100 fewer yards per game, dropped from a 2/1 td/int ratio to a 1.8/1 ratio, blah blah blah...... You can argue your opinion all day long, but the stats and facts don't lie. And, the fact of the matter is, the Big 10's all time passing leader was a great college quarterback.


Here is a little something from an article before his Rose Bowl game-

He provides Purdue with the same tangible behind center that Marques Tuiasosopo gives the Huskies -- a proven winner. Brees recently led the Boilermakers to same-season victories over the Big Ten's old guard, Michigan and Ohio State, for the first time in 16 yes. He beat Notre Dame as a junior, Kansas State in the Alamo Bowl as a sophomore.

Only Brees, a 6-foot-1, 220-pounder, does it in more spectacular fashion. One game from the end of his collegiate career, Brees is the most prolific passer in Big Ten history, in most categories by wide margins. He is the career leader in pass attempts (by 330), completions (by 206), passing yards (by 1,056 yards) and touchdown passes (by 14).

His career passing line: 1,003-for-1,639 for 11,517 yards and 88 touchdowns.


Said Notre Dame coach Bob Davie, "He's a great player, legitimately a great player."


Sure it's only Bob Davie, but he has forgotten more about football than you or I will ever know. And according to Davie, you're off your rocker.

 

[Adrenaline]

You brought up Brees when I said KSU was horribly overrated, which they were, and he was a Sophomore then. My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.

I kind of pointed out that heisman voting wasn't that crucial, you brought up heisman first. You wanted people that were supposedly better, I provided you the list of people supposedly better. That award LOVES QBs way to much, moreso than it should.

Trying to find a any 9 year NFL vet that is worse than they were in college would be hard. There are plenty that are slightly better than they were in college. Brees is phenomenal now. I noted that he has become far far far far better now than he was in college.

Other than Manning and brady, I would NOT place any other QB over Brees at this time in the NFL.

I am out. Later.

 

[chalmers]

lol @ Adrenaline. Seriously dude, you are so smart and intelligent concerning football. Do you happen to work for ESPN? I'd buy your newsletter. You know it all my man.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
You brought up Brees when I said KSU was horribly overrated, which they were, and he was a Sophomore then. My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.

I kind of pointed out that heisman voting wasn't that crucial, you brought up heisman first. You wanted people that were supposedly better, I provided you the list of people supposedly better. That award LOVES QBs way to much, moreso than it should.

Trying to find a any 9 year NFL vet that is worse than they were in college would be hard. There are plenty that are slightly better than they were in college. Brees is phenomenal now. I noted that he has become far far far far better now than he was in college.

Other than Manning and brady, I would NOT place any other QB over Brees at this time in the NFL.

I am out. Later.

You should just give it up, Brees won the Maxwell which proves JDawg's point. Your argument is incredibly weak admitting he was "good" but not "great". Even if you concede that he was "good" then it makes you look like a moron for saying that KSU was "horribly overrated".

BTW, I'd take a healthy Big Ben over Brees "at this time". Brees has a rating edge but he's not a proven winner yet.

 

[chalmers]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
You brought up Brees when I said KSU was horribly overrated, which they were, and he was a Sophomore then. My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.

I kind of pointed out that heisman voting wasn't that crucial, you brought up heisman first. You wanted people that were supposedly better, I provided you the list of people supposedly better. That award LOVES QBs way to much, moreso than it should.

Trying to find a any 9 year NFL vet that is worse than they were in college would be hard. There are plenty that are slightly better than they were in college. Brees is phenomenal now. I noted that he has become far far far far better now than he was in college.

Other than Manning and brady, I would NOT place any other QB over Brees at this time in the NFL.

I am out. Later.

You should just give it up, Brees won the Maxwell which proves JDawg's point. Your argument is incredibly weak admitting he was "good" but not "great". Even if you concede that he was "good" then it makes you look like a moron for saying that KSU was "horribly overrated".

BTW, I'd take a healthy Big Ben over Brees "at this time". Brees has a rating edge but he's not a proven winner yet.

Um...football is a team sport. Ben was thrown onto a much better team than Brees was. Brees has a much larger skill set wise than Ben does. I don't think it's even close.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: chalmers

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
You brought up Brees when I said KSU was horribly overrated, which they were, and he was a Sophomore then. My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.

I kind of pointed out that heisman voting wasn't that crucial, you brought up heisman first. You wanted people that were supposedly better, I provided you the list of people supposedly better. That award LOVES QBs way to much, moreso than it should.

Trying to find a any 9 year NFL vet that is worse than they were in college would be hard. There are plenty that are slightly better than they were in college. Brees is phenomenal now. I noted that he has become far far far far better now than he was in college.

Other than Manning and brady, I would NOT place any other QB over Brees at this time in the NFL.

I am out. Later.

You should just give it up, Brees won the Maxwell which proves JDawg's point. Your argument is incredibly weak admitting he was "good" but not "great". Even if you concede that he was "good" then it makes you look like a moron for saying that KSU was "horribly overrated".

BTW, I'd take a healthy Big Ben over Brees "at this time". Brees has a rating edge but he's not a proven winner yet.

Um...football is a team sport. Ben was thrown onto a much better team than Brees was. Brees has a much larger skill set wise than Ben does. I don't think it's even close.

Um...no sht it's a team sport. I'm still taking Big Ben. Let's see, he has a slightly higher career rating than Brees, a virtually identical completion % and is better in short yardage scrambling situations because of his size. This is all aside from his clutch ability. It's a no brainer even if he has had better "teams" and by that I mean defenses, NOT offense.

 

[chalmers]

What was your psychological reason for typing 'Um...' to begin your statement just as I did.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: chalmers
What was your psychological reason for typing 'Um...' to begin your statement just as I did.

I'm gregarious. And you didn't respond to my logic of taking Big Ben over Brees. The stats don't lie. Brees is great (slightly higher passer rating, 5%, in postseason in 6 less games) but I'm still taking Ben because he's a proven winner and is almost statistically identical except he gives you short yardage options.

 

[chalmers]

Ok cool. Well my opinion is that Brees is a higher skilled quarterback than Ben. He's also way smaller, which is a huge disadvantage. The fact that he can out stat Ben being half his size says alot about how good he is. As a football player, Ben may be better because he plays bro football, running around hard to tackle, but for pure quarterback passing skill, Brees kills him.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: chalmers
Ok cool. Well my opinion is that Brees is a higher skilled quarterback than Ben. He's also way smaller, which is a huge disadvantage. The fact that he can out stat Ben being half his size says alot about how good he is. As a football player, Ben may be better because he plays bro football, running around hard to tackle, but for pure quarterback passing skill, Brees kills him.

I guess I'm still failing to see how Brees kills him, they have almost identical career passer ratings and % completions. Just because Brees is in a pass heavy offense doesn't mean he's the better choice. It has nothing to do with bro football and everything to do with more options. If Big Ben can pound out a 2 yd TD on the 2 then that means more options, if you want to talk "skillset". I guess I'm failing to see how Brees kills him unless you think passer rating and completion % numbers are complete BS. Both are over 100 rating (104 and 118) so far this season, hence my statement that Brees isn't the obvious choice over Big Ben. You can't even say that Brees is a bigger "deep threat" passer, look at 40+ yard pass stats: Brees (7~ full seasons including this year)=67, Ben (5~full seasons including this year)=45. It makes you wonder how Big Ben would perform in a pass heavy offense like NO.

 

[Onita]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: chalmers
Ok cool. Well my opinion is that Brees is a higher skilled quarterback than Ben. He's also way smaller, which is a huge disadvantage. The fact that he can out stat Ben being half his size says alot about how good he is. As a football player, Ben may be better because he plays bro football, running around hard to tackle, but for pure quarterback passing skill, Brees kills him.

I guess I'm still failing to see how Brees kills him, they have almost identical career passer ratings and % completions. Just because Brees is in a pass heavy offense doesn't mean he's the better choice. It has nothing to do with bro football and everything to do with more options. If Big Ben can pound out a 2 yd TD on the 2 then that means more options, if you want to talk "skillset". I guess I'm failing to see how Brees kills him unless you think passer rating and completion % numbers are complete BS. Both are over 100 rating (104 and 118) so far this season, hence my statement that Brees isn't the obvious choice over Big Ben. You can't even say that Brees is a bigger "deep threat" passer, look at 40+ yard pass stats: Brees (7~ full seasons including this year)=67, Ben (5~full seasons including this year)=45. It makes you wonder how Big Ben would perform in a pass heavy offense like NO.

Passer rating is a flawed stat. Brees puts up higher yards. Ben gets sacked more and turns the ball over more.

EDIT: Although he's been great this year, and gets better yearly.

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: Onita

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: chalmers
Ok cool. Well my opinion is that Brees is a higher skilled quarterback than Ben. He's also way smaller, which is a huge disadvantage. The fact that he can out stat Ben being half his size says alot about how good he is. As a football player, Ben may be better because he plays bro football, running around hard to tackle, but for pure quarterback passing skill, Brees kills him.

I guess I'm still failing to see how Brees kills him, they have almost identical career passer ratings and % completions. Just because Brees is in a pass heavy offense doesn't mean he's the better choice. It has nothing to do with bro football and everything to do with more options. If Big Ben can pound out a 2 yd TD on the 2 then that means more options, if you want to talk "skillset". I guess I'm failing to see how Brees kills him unless you think passer rating and completion % numbers are complete BS. Both are over 100 rating (104 and 118) so far this season, hence my statement that Brees isn't the obvious choice over Big Ben. You can't even say that Brees is a bigger "deep threat" passer, look at 40+ yard pass stats: Brees (7~ full seasons including this year)=67, Ben (5~full seasons including this year)=45. It makes you wonder how Big Ben would perform in a pass heavy offense like NO.

Passer rating is a flawed stat. Brees puts up higher yards. Ben gets sacked more and turns the ball over more.

EDIT: Although he's been great this year, and gets better yearly.

Way to derail a football thread with a football thread.

 

[Adrenaline]

Originally posted by: chalmers
lol @ Adrenaline. Seriously dude, you are so smart and intelligent concerning football. Do you happen to work for ESPN? I'd buy your newsletter. You know it all my man.

I am here to entertain and provide information. I am extremely analytical. I do my best and if I am proven wrong, then I will admit it unlike other people who refuse to accept anything other than what they believe as an opinion to be a fact. I will do my best to provide logic and reasoning along with stats if I can to counter-point someone.

I try not to cuss or talk down to someone, it is called showing respect and having dignity when having a conversation. When people start cussing or talking down, I just zone them out whether it is reading on a board (and yes, I can sense sarcasm most of the time) like this or having a conversation in real life.

I do not work for ESPN but google can be a powerful thing to back up a discussion.

 

[Adrenaline]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
You brought up Brees when I said KSU was horribly overrated, which they were, and he was a Sophomore then. My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.

I kind of pointed out that heisman voting wasn't that crucial, you brought up heisman first. You wanted people that were supposedly better, I provided you the list of people supposedly better. That award LOVES QBs way to much, moreso than it should.

Trying to find a any 9 year NFL vet that is worse than they were in college would be hard. There are plenty that are slightly better than they were in college. Brees is phenomenal now. I noted that he has become far far far far better now than he was in college.

Other than Manning and brady, I would NOT place any other QB over Brees at this time in the NFL.

I am out. Later.

You should just give it up, Brees won the Maxwell which proves JDawg's point. Your argument is incredibly weak admitting he was "good" but not "great". Even if you concede that he was "good" then it makes you look like a moron for saying that KSU was "horribly overrated".

BTW, I'd take a healthy Big Ben over Brees "at this time". Brees has a rating edge but he's not a proven winner yet.

Comparing Brees after his Sophomore year to Brees after his Senior year is way out there. That is like comparing Brees after his third year in the NFL (2003) to Brees after his sixth (2006) it dosn't relly make sense as he is bound to get better. Or you could take his fourth year (2004) and compare it to his eighth (2008) as an equal spacing of 4 years instead of the three I put up there since it was an equal time of 2 years for each segment in his college year I am comparing.

So please, do not compare Maxwell Winner Brees (well earned) to Sophomore year Brees saying it is the same guy he was as a Sophomore.

KSU was so overrated they did not get a BCS bowl the year they hit #1 in the rankings and only lost in their own Championship game before bowl bids went out. They did not even get 1 of the 2 at large bids that year, further proof what the BCS thought about them as a team. Then they proceeded to lose to an unranked team in their bowl game.

1998-1999 BSC bowl games The at large bids went to Florida and Ohio State.

Kansas State was ranked #3 and got passed over for a #4 (Ohio State) and #8 (Florida) team for a BCS bowl game.

Facts backing me up again.

 

[JDawg1536]

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
You brought up Brees when I said KSU was horribly overrated, which they were, and he was a Sophomore then. My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.

I kind of pointed out that heisman voting wasn't that crucial, you brought up heisman first. You wanted people that were supposedly better, I provided you the list of people supposedly better. That award LOVES QBs way to much, moreso than it should.

Trying to find a any 9 year NFL vet that is worse than they were in college would be hard. There are plenty that are slightly better than they were in college. Brees is phenomenal now. I noted that he has become far far far far better now than he was in college.

Other than Manning and brady, I would NOT place any other QB over Brees at this time in the NFL.

I am out. Later.

You should just give it up, Brees won the Maxwell which proves JDawg's point. Your argument is incredibly weak admitting he was "good" but not "great". Even if you concede that he was "good" then it makes you look like a moron for saying that KSU was "horribly overrated".

BTW, I'd take a healthy Big Ben over Brees "at this time". Brees has a rating edge but he's not a proven winner yet.

Comparing Brees after his Sophomore year to Brees after his Senior year is way out there. That is like comparing Brees after his third year in the NFL (2003) to Brees after his sixth (2006) it dosn't relly make sense as he is bound to get better. Or you could take his fourth year (2004) and compare it to his eighth (2008) as an equal spacing of 4 years instead of the three I put up there since it was an equal time of 2 years for each segment in his college year I am comparing.

So please, do not compare Maxwell Winner Brees (well earned) to Sophomore year Brees saying it is the same guy he was as a Sophomore.

KSU was so overrated they did not get a BCS bowl the year they hit #1 in the rankings and only lost in their own Championship game before bowl bids went out. They did not even get 1 of the 2 at large bids that year, further proof what the BCS thought about them as a team. Then they proceeded to lose to an unranked team in their bowl game.

1998-1999 BSC bowl games The at large bids went to Florida and Ohio State.

Kansas State was ranked #3 and got passed over for a #4 (Ohio State) and #8 (Florida) team for a BCS bowl game.

Facts backing me up again.

1998 569 361 20 3,983 39 .634
1999 554 337 12 3,909 25 .608
2000 512 309 12 3,668 26 .604

You are 100% correct. Brees was not the same in 1998 as he was when he won the Maxwell Award in 2000. His stats were much better as a soph. Stats aren't the be all end all, but you seem to think that the numbers hold all the answers. In that case, you fail once again, only this time much harder.

 

[Adrenaline]

Originally posted by: JDawg1536

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
You brought up Brees when I said KSU was horribly overrated, which they were, and he was a Sophomore then. My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.

I kind of pointed out that heisman voting wasn't that crucial, you brought up heisman first. You wanted people that were supposedly better, I provided you the list of people supposedly better. That award LOVES QBs way to much, moreso than it should.

Trying to find a any 9 year NFL vet that is worse than they were in college would be hard. There are plenty that are slightly better than they were in college. Brees is phenomenal now. I noted that he has become far far far far better now than he was in college.

Other than Manning and brady, I would NOT place any other QB over Brees at this time in the NFL.

I am out. Later.

You should just give it up, Brees won the Maxwell which proves JDawg's point. Your argument is incredibly weak admitting he was "good" but not "great". Even if you concede that he was "good" then it makes you look like a moron for saying that KSU was "horribly overrated".

BTW, I'd take a healthy Big Ben over Brees "at this time". Brees has a rating edge but he's not a proven winner yet.

Comparing Brees after his Sophomore year to Brees after his Senior year is way out there. That is like comparing Brees after his third year in the NFL (2003) to Brees after his sixth (2006) it dosn't relly make sense as he is bound to get better. Or you could take his fourth year (2004) and compare it to his eighth (2008) as an equal spacing of 4 years instead of the three I put up there since it was an equal time of 2 years for each segment in his college year I am comparing.

So please, do not compare Maxwell Winner Brees (well earned) to Sophomore year Brees saying it is the same guy he was as a Sophomore.

KSU was so overrated they did not get a BCS bowl the year they hit #1 in the rankings and only lost in their own Championship game before bowl bids went out. They did not even get 1 of the 2 at large bids that year, further proof what the BCS thought about them as a team. Then they proceeded to lose to an unranked team in their bowl game.

1998-1999 BSC bowl games The at large bids went to Florida and Ohio State.

Kansas State was ranked #3 and got passed over for a #4 (Ohio State) and #8 (Florida) team for a BCS bowl game.

Facts backing me up again.

1998 569 361 20 3,983 39 .634
1999 554 337 12 3,909 25 .608
2000 512 309 12 3,668 26 .604

You are 100% correct. Brees was not the same in 1998 as he was when he won the Maxwell Award in 2000. His stats were much better as a soph. Stats aren't the be all end all, but you seem to think that the numbers hold all the answers. In that case, you fail once again, only this time much harder.

I do not recall comparing stats as the answers to everything, or else I would not have said 2004 (when he was a pro bowl QB) and compared it to 2008 (which was statistically a better year but he was a better player in general). I KNEW you were going to say this so here is something for you:

Saying stats were what defined him would mean he deserved the Maxwell more his Sophomore year over his Senior year. Did he get the "collegiate lifetime achievement" votes like some of the hiesman winners in the past have?

Like I said before, Brees was good his Sophomore year and got better, but you fail to see me state that over and over. His Purdue team was "ok" his Sophomore year, finished 4th in the Big 10. Good or ok, however you choose to see it.

Purdue did not play Michigan or Ohio State that year in the Big 10, both finished ahead of Purdue, but they did play Wisconsin (finished ahead of Purdue) and lost to them and Penn State (finished right behind Purdue) and lost to them.

Big 10 play that year (1998)

Penn State's 3 losses in conference play were to Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio State.
Michigan lost to Ohio State
Wisconsin lost to Michigan
Ohio State lost to Michigan State

Perhaps Penn State (finished ranked higher) was better than Purdue that year but it did not show in the standings. Purdue was 4th in the league, losing to 1 team ahead of them and not playing the other 2, so he bottom fed for stats perhaps? Either way he was a good QB that got better all around as his collegiate career went on.

I have proven my points but you fail to see them. Keep talking down to me when you are still wrong just makes you look worse.

I have backed my opinions with facts and more facts yet you still reply. This was fun at first now it has become rather old proving you wrong. I am done replying to you as you do not do enough research about a subject when replying. Reply all you want but I will not revisit this thread. You can PM if you so desire.

 

[JDawg1536]

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
I have proven my points but you fail to see them.

Uh huh. Yet you still continue to say things like this-

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
Comparing Brees after his Sophomore year to Brees after his Senior year is way out there.

How is that "way out there"? Did you even ever see him play a single game? I highly doubt it.

My issue with your extremely apparent lack of knowledge about anything concerning a game with a ball of any kind is now only with your evaluation of Drew Brees as a college player. You claimed that he was not that great a player, which is down right without a doubt 100% the most ludicrous evaluation of athletic talent in the history of man kind, only to make a lame attempt at backpedaling and attempting to retract your ignorant statement without admitting you were wrong.

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.


Comparing Brees after his Sophomore year to Brees after his Senior year is way out there. That is like comparing Brees after his third year in the NFL (2003) to Brees after his sixth (2006) it dosn't relly make sense as he is bound to get better.


So please, do not compare Maxwell Winner Brees (well earned) to Sophomore year Brees saying it is the same guy he was as a Sophomore.

All of those statements are stupid. Considering the fact that he had more TD passes, more yards, more completions, and led Purdue to a better record as a sophomore than he did as a junior or senior, not only is the comparison not "way out there", it could easily be argued that the Drew Brees that won the Maxwell award was actually worse than he was as a sophomore. But, since he wasn't a great quarterback, I'll quit discussing him.

 

[PGriff]

OK Pitt at 20 thats nice news. If they hadn't choked on their own vomit against NC State they would be sittin real nice

 

[JDawg1536]

Only #20? Psh... according to Mr. Adrenaline they suck then.

 

[miketheidiot]

a football thread got derailed with a football thread

 

[fustercluck]

holy crap Arizona is on there. I never even considered they'd be on it. Cool beans. We got an awesome QB for once, though.

 

[colletti]

Okay, I'm a USC fan from CA and I'm going to college in Idaho and I gotta say..Boise State ranked this much better then USC??? WTF???
This is pretty insane.
One way or the other though, I'm sick of the Big 12/ SEC schools getting such a good rep compared to the West.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: JDawg1536

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
I have proven my points but you fail to see them.

Uh huh. Yet you still continue to say things like this-

Originally posted by: Adrenaline
Comparing Brees after his Sophomore year to Brees after his Senior year is way out there.

How is that "way out there"? Did you even ever see him play a single game? I highly doubt it.

My issue with your extremely apparent lack of knowledge about anything concerning a game with a ball of any kind is now only with your evaluation of Drew Brees as a college player. You claimed that he was not that great a player, which is down right without a doubt 100% the most ludicrous evaluation of athletic talent in the history of man kind, only to make a lame attempt at backpedaling and attempting to retract your ignorant statement without admitting you were wrong.

Originally posted by: Adrenaline

My point was that he was a good (then) QB and got MUCH better, that was the point. Davie was talking about Brees at the end of his senior year and you brought him up for his sophomore year.


Comparing Brees after his Sophomore year to Brees after his Senior year is way out there. That is like comparing Brees after his third year in the NFL (2003) to Brees after his sixth (2006) it dosn't relly make sense as he is bound to get better.


So please, do not compare Maxwell Winner Brees (well earned) to Sophomore year Brees saying it is the same guy he was as a Sophomore.

All of those statements are stupid. Considering the fact that he had more TD passes, more yards, more completions, and led Purdue to a better record as a sophomore than he did as a junior or senior, not only is the comparison not "way out there", it could easily be argued that the Drew Brees that won the Maxwell award was actually worse than he was as a sophomore. But, since he wasn't a great quarterback, I'll quit discussing him.

^^ /Agree, next thing you know he'll start talking about "intangibles" since the tangibles clearly don't support his argument.