Trent Edwards

[PushthePile]

it went right over your head didn't it? here let me break it down for you, since you weren't able to figure it out the first time around.

 

the reason why I brought up that he was considered one of the top High School QB's by just about every ranking, was: now get ready pushpile,

 

He could of played anywhere and if given the opportunity, He could of very well of beat out any of those prospects. Maybe Quinn would of been tough because of all the hype surrounding him, but there is every reason to think that he could of beaten the rest out.

 

now if you want to discount highschool prospect player rankings, and believe that it doesn't impact on whether or not they get an opportunity to play at the next level, specially if you were USA Today #1 Ranked pro-style QB, Then you are really more naive than I thought you were.

 

Come on Pushpile, you can do better than that.

Oh Magox, you are still dealing in the what if department, huh?

Simple Terms:

1. Quinn- you already admitted to the hype, probably ruling out Edwards.

2. Leak- I'm sorry if you don't like it, but Urban Myers would never go into a season with Edwards as a starter. I'm not saying Leak or even Tebow are better Qbs than Edwards. I'm just saying Edwards is not mobile and would look terrible in that system. FWIW, so would many great Qbs.

3. Henne- Chad Henne holds the Michigan record for yards, tds, and completions. He is one of the best Qbs in the teams history and one of the most popular. It's a stretch to think Edwards would have waltzed in and been more successful than Henne. You deal in alot of assumptions and potential talk, when Edwards comes up. He also has the second most tds in the history of the Big Ten.

4. Ainge- Edwards is a better Qb and I think would have been the starter.

 

Why is this so hard for you? I think he is way better than Leak. I think he is way better than Ainge. I think he is probably better than Henne. I don't know what to expect out of Quinn. The college game is way different, you know that. Why was Tom Brady so up and down in college? I think you also know that High School rankings aren't worth as much as the paper they are written on. They are similar to draft magazines and Mel Kiper. It is not proof that Edwards could have walked onto any campus and demanded a starting job. Be honest with yourself Magox. He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs.

[Magox]

Oh Magox, your still dealing in the what if department, huh?

Simple Terms:

1. Quinn- you already admitted to the hype, probably ruling out Edwards.

2. Leak- I'm sorry if you don't like it, but Urban Myers would never go into a season with Edwards as a starter. I'm not saying Leak or even Tebow are better Qbs than Edwards. I'm just saying Edwards is not mobile and would look terrible in that system. FWIW, so would many great Qbs.

3. Henne- Chad Henne holds the Michigan record for yards, tds, and completions. He is one of the best Qbs in the teams history and one of the most popular. It's a stretch to think Edwards would have waltzed in and been more successful than Henne. You deal in alot of assumptions and potential talk, when Edwards comes up. He also has the second most tds in the history of the Big Ten.

4. Ainge- Edwards is a better Qb and I think would have been the starter.

 

Why is this so hard for you? I think he is way better than Leak. I think he is way better than Ainge. I think he is probably better than Henne. I don't know what to expect out of Quinn. The college game is way different, you know that. Why was Tom Brady so up and down in college? I think you also know that High School rankings aren't worth as much as the paper they are written on. They are similar to draft magazines and Mel Kiper. It is not proof that Edwards could have walked onto any campus and demanded a starting job. Be honest with yourself Magox. He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs.

You are still not understanding my point.

 

And did you just really say that? He wasn't going to start for a lot of big time programs, but yet he is a starter in the pro's?

Let me say this again, so it can sink in.

 

He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs? HAHA

 

you didn't just say that did you? You are so blinded by your bias against Trent that you fail to see the simplest of things.

 

He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs

 

Now that is classic!

 

good one

[PushthePile]

You are still not understanding my point.

 

And did you just really say that? He wasn't going to start for a lot of big time programs, but yet he is a starter in the pro's?

Let me say this again, so it can sink in.

 

He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs? HAHA

 

you didn't just say that did you? You are so blinded by your bias against Trent that you fail to see the simplest of things.

 

He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs

 

Now that is classic!

 

good one

Why are you so out of touch? Trent Edwards would have had a better chance of beating out Tom Brady than Chad Henne. THE COLLEGE GAME IS DIFFERENT THAN THE NFL. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS? West Virginia and Florida are big time programs, how do you think Edwards would fair? How about Boston College? Would he have had his highschool rankings in hand, when battling Matt Ryan? What about LSU? You think he would have started four years with Jamarcus Russell there?

Can you say he would have beat out Brian Brohm in Louisville? No you can't. Your high school player ranking don't mean anything, other than he looked good in highschool. Players mature at different rates. Coachs like different players for different reasons. THE GAME IS DIFFERENT.

 

 

The fact that you don't realize the difference between college success and NFL success is classic. Sprinkle in your highschool research and you make the all-time classic list. I can't understand how any of these college greats bust in the NFL and HOFs get drafted late? The NFL just doesn't go as far back in research as you, I guess.

[Magox]

Why are you so out of touch? Trent Edwards would have had a better chance of beating out Tom Brady than Chad Henne. THE COLLEGE GAME IS DIFFERENT THAN THE NFL. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS? West Virginia and Florida are big time programs, how do you think Edwards would fair? How about Boston College? Would he have had his highschool rankings in hand, when battling Matt Ryan? What about LSU? You think he would have started four years with Jamarcus Russell there?

Can you say he would have beat out Brian Brohm in Louisville? No you can't. Your high school player ranking don't mean anything, other than he looked good in highschool. Players mature at different rates. Coachs like different players for different reasons. THE GAME IS DIFFERENT.

 

 

The fact that you don't realize the difference between college success and NFL success is classic. Sprinkle in your highschool research and you make the all-time classic list. I can't understand how any of these college greats bust in the NFL and HOFs get drafted late? The NFL just doesn't go as far back in research as you, I guess.

sorry man, I'm not going to let you live that one down.

 

good stuff

[PushthePile]

sorry man, I'm not going to let you live that one down.

 

good stuff

Bring it up often, my friend. You are flat out wrong and it's an easy argument.

[generaLee83]

But he had a fantastic defense and a great coaching staff that knew how to put them in position to make plays.

 

Don't forget to throw in the years of sytematic cheating, that also helps.

 

I hate the pats.

[Flbillsfan#1]

Don't forget to throw in the years of sytematic cheating, that also helps.

 

I hate the pats.*

Fixed it for you

[Cru Jones]

Correlating wins and losses to the single player who touches the ball the most is far from a stretch.

Then it wouldnt be a stretch to say that centers correlate to wins anfd losses?

[The Dean]

You are still not understanding my point.

 

And did you just really say that? He wasn't going to start for a lot of big time programs, but yet he is a starter in the pro's?

Let me say this again, so it can sink in.

 

He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs? HAHA

 

you didn't just say that did you? You are so blinded by your bias against Trent that you fail to see the simplest of things.

 

He wasn't going to start at alot of big time programs

 

Now that is classic!

 

good one

 

Nobody knows if Trent would have started at those programs, or not. Anyone who claims to know for sure, is lying.

 

But, keep in mind Edwards "was ranked as the #1 pro-style quarterback by USA Today in 2001. Rivals rated Edwards as the #2 pro-style quarterback and #20 player overall in its rankings"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Edwards

 

He was probably more highly rated, and sought after than Brady Quinn, coming out of high school.

 

He very well might have started at ANY program he attended.

 

It doesn't mean squat now, of course, but had he started at one of those other schools, he probably would have been drafted in an earlier round. What about that is so hard to understand?

[Orton's Arm]

I think you are confusing what GM's value, with how much a QB contributes to a win. They are VERY different concepts.

I agree they are different concepts.

 

In fact, you could make an argument that there's a big difference between, say, the ten best kickers in the league and the ten worst, that this difference makes a significant impact on the outcome of football games, and that general managers should therefore be trying harder to outbid each other for the best kickers. In other words, the positions general managers value and those they should value are not necessarily the same. Determining which positions they do value is just one possible starting point in determining how positions should be valued.

Your analysis, while flawed, may be a way to look at what the NFL values, by position. It doesn't look at what the position of QB contributes to football and certainly has nothing to do with what a particular QB contributes to his team's wins and losses.

I agree that applying my method to individual quarterbacks would be risky, and would frequently lead to inaccurate results. Contracts are forward looking, and are based on a player's expected contribution to the team's success. Often, individual players play at a level that's higher or lower than what had been envisioned when their contracts were signed. This is less of a problem when you average things out over a lot of players, but there will still be some granularity in my method even so.

 

But, even if you decide to settle on the mundane "what does the NFL value", make sure you factor in the bench and ST players. A QB making $1 million that plays 10 plays on season was how valuable, exactly? How about punters and place kickers who contribute at a level FAR above their salaries (if you live in the real world), but would have to contribute equally to their salaries, in an analysis such as you propose.

 

The reason why ST players make so little is not because they contribute little in an absolute sense, but because it's apparently felt that the supply of reasonably competent special teams players may exceed demand. There's no reason for teams to get into bidding wars with each other under those circumstances.

 

Sometimes, a special teams player like Steve Tasker might come along, who contributes a lot more to his team's effort than a normal guy would. And players like that should make considerably more than average special teams players do. And to a certain degree that's the case: Adam Vinateri, for example, signed a big contract. One could argue that special teams players should, in general, be getting paid more than they are, and that general managers are making a mistake by not bidding more heavily for the services of the best special teams players. If you were a general manager who felt this way, it would make sense to try to outbid other teams for the best special teams players. The more general managers who felt this way, the higher special teams players' salaries would become.

 

What about players who play their positions, and ST? Don't they confound their positional worth?

 

They certainly contribute, but the question is: how does their contribution compare to the one that could have been made by guys who almost--but didn't quite--make the final roster cut?

[Guest dog14787]

How about this: I'll spell out the assumptions I've made, and then you tell me where we agree and where we disagree.

 

Assumptions:

1. General managers are, on average, highly competent judges of football players and their relative contributions to teams.

2. No team has unlimited resources, due to the salary cap and other spending constraints. By witnessing how teams allocate their scare resources, we can determine which positions general managers most value.

3. Suppose that players at a given position are, on average, being underpaid relative to the impact they are having on football games. Presumably, general managers are smart enough to notice this. Once they figure this out, they'll become willing to spend more money on that position, in order to outbid other general managers while getting good value for their money. This will tend to drive up the average salary at that position.

4. Because of 1-3, the percentage of player salary devoted to a specific position represents a rough consensus of general managers about the relative worth of that position. The picture can be a bit grainy; but it nevertheless represents a fairly good approximation of how general managers have prioritized their spending, and hence, which positions they most value.

 

 

The method I've described is just one way of looking at which positions general managers tend to value most highly. It's not intended to take the place of watching individual players' contributions on the field. In fact, watching those contributions is the best way of seeing where there might be flaws with the general managers' consensus. I've seen one or two articles contending that certain positions are underpaid, relative to the contributions players at those positions make on the field.

 

 

Your suggestion would be a place to start. But I think we'd both agree that there's more to the story than that method would imply. For example, let's say that you're comparing two WRs with the exact same stats. But one of those guys put up those numbers while being consistently double covered; while the other guy has spent his career playing across from Jerry Rice. Even though--statistically--the two WRs seem identical, the fact is that the guy who produces despite being double covered should expect to earn more. The (expected) difference in salary represents the fact that general managers have thoroughly evaluated these guys' play, and have concluded that a guy who produces in double coverage has more value to his team than a guy who does not.

 

Of course, this method is far from perfect when used on individual players, because we're all aware of individual players who are wildly overpaid or underpaid based on their on-field performance. But when you take the average of salaries across all the players at a given position, you can get a sense of the extent to which general managers feel that the specific position is contributing to the overall result of football games.

 

 

After reading over all of this again, it would be interesting to see data for all positions and also to watch for trends over an extended period and see how it compares relative to previous drafts or the over all state of the league. I'm also interested in once you have an average, how it compares from team to team, you would then be able to actually get into the minds of the FO and have a better understanding of what they are trying to achieve. You could also take the best teams, say like the Pats and mold yourself more closer to what they do provided it fits your Coaching Philosophy.

 

Interesting stuff

[The Dean]

After reading over all of this again, it would be interesting to see data for all positions and also to watch for trends over an extended period and see how it compares relative to previous drafts or the over all state of the league. I'm also interested in once you have an average, how it compares from team to team, you would then be able to actually get into the minds of the FO and have a better understanding of what they are trying to achieve. You could also take the best teams, say like the Pats and mold yourself more closer to what they do provided it fits your Coaching Philosophy.

 

Interesting stuff

 

 

You would undoubtedly find that different teams value players differently, and that a lot of it has to do with the personnel currently on the team, and that the style and philosophy of teams vary.

[Guest dog14787]

You would undoubtedly find that different teams value players differently, and that a lot of it has to do with the personnel currently on the team, and that the style and philosophy of teams vary.

 

 

I agree, having Tom Brady probably steers you towards getting one of the best WR's in the league like a Randy Moss and its likely you will be willing to pay more to get him. Someone that runs the ball more and is conservative minded like the big Tuna for instance will place more emphasis on defense and a RB.

 

I realize there's allot of variables involved making it hard to get a clear cut picture, but It would be interesting to know what the league as a whole averages out at and then compare it to each individual team and style of play. Also a comparison on the successful teams vs the non successful teams would be interesting.

[Hanoverbills]

But he wasn't a first round pick. He was supposed to be developed slowly as we found out about Losman. Unfortunately, Losman got hurt and ultimately flopped and Edwards was threw into the fire. So for a 3rd round pick, he has be amazing. i really don't know many QBs that would succeed with our receiving core. Josh Reed is a great 33 receiver but a terrible #2 (one of the worst in the league). Robert Royal is a terrible starting TE and hurt the team more than he helped it.

 

Year 3 is the year that most players make the jump or fall on their faces. I have to assume the Bills will get the line sorted out and we will be able to fully judge TE because he finally has weapons. Additionally, I think it is very important to get a tight end to be Trent's security blanket (I'm huge fan of trading down and getting Pettigrew).

 

And if Trent decided to go to Cal, Michigan, or UCLA instead of Standford, he would have be a 1st rounder. http://www.rivals.com/viewprospect.asp?Spo...amp;pr_key=1949 But because he was a moron and cared about more than just football, his growth was stunted because the Cardinal were miserbale.

Amazing?, How about Cassel? Hasn't started since High school. Or Romo ,Warner and Garcia who weren't drafted, now that is amazing. QB drafted in the third round would be considered a good QB who would have a chance to start in the NFL.

[Magox]

Amazing?, How about Cassel? Hasn't started since High school. Or Romo ,Warner and Garcia who weren't drafted, now that is amazing. QB drafted in the third round would be considered a good QB who would have a chance to start in the NFL.

I just wanted to bring this up again

 

 

#1 overall pick Jamarcus Russel

#22 overall pick Brady Quinn

#40 overall pick John Beck

#43 overall pick Drew Stanton

#92 overall pick Trent Edwards

#103 overall pick Isiah Stanback

#151 overall pick Jeff rowe

#174 overall pick Troy Smith

#205 overall pick Jordan Palmer

[C.Biscuit97]

Amazing?, How about Cassel? Hasn't started since High school. Or Romo ,Warner and Garcia who weren't drafted, now that is amazing. QB drafted in the third round would be considered a good QB who would have a chance to start in the NFL.

 

 

Cassel sat 3 years behind the best QB in football. When he finally got to play, he got to play with the most dominant receiver in football who was the reason guys like Culpepper, Brady, and the over hill guys like Cunningham & Jeff George have by far their best seasons. Moss makes QBs.

 

Romo also sat 3 seasons before playing. When he did, he got to play with the 2nd best receiver of his generation and the league's best all around TE. Pretty nice situation for any QB to step into.

 

Warner played 5 seasons of pro football. Amazing experience. He then got to play with one of the most amazing offensive talent ever assembled. Obviously, he was a huge part of it but it was a great situation to set into.

 

Garcia played 3 or 4 seasons of pro football in Canada. got to play with TO in his absolute prime and Jerry Rice. Again, a great situation to set into.

 

Edwards had to play as a rookie with one legit receiving threat that opposing teams worry about. Not many QBs would be successful in that situation. For the first time in his career (though he still is at an earlier stage than all the QBs you named), he has at least a somewhat comparable cast. This is the season when we will know about Edwards. But not based off his first 2 seasons with Royal and Reed as a #2.

[The Dean]

Cassel sat 3 years behind the best QB in football. When he finally got to play, he got to play with the most dominant receiver in football who was the reason guys like Culpepper, Brady, and the over hill guys like Cunningham & Jeff George have by far their best seasons. Moss makes QBs.

 

 

Yes, Moss makes QBs, just ask the Raiders about that.

 

[C.Biscuit97]

Yes, Moss makes QBs, just ask the Raiders about that.

 

 

 

Well Kerry Collins did have 2 of the top 3 tds passing seasons of his career with Oakland. Moss quit on the Raiders because it was a very messed up situation and continues to be. Not saying he was right, but the fact that 5 QBs have had by far the best season in the NFL playing Moss speaks to his abilities.

 

Are you really arguing that Moss does make QBs much, much, much better players???

[The Dean]

Well Kerry Collins did have 2 of the top 3 tds passing seasons of his career with Oakland. Moss quit on the Raiders because it was a very messed up situation and continues to be. Not saying he was right, but the fact that 5 QBs have had by far the best season in the NFL playing Moss speaks to his abilities.

 

Are you really arguing that Moss does make QBs much, much, much better players???

 

 

I'm saying Moss played A PART in Cassel's success (hell, so did Welker), last year, but McDaniels, Brady and Belicheat played a bigger part.

[Hanoverbills]

I just wanted to bring this up again

 

 

#1 overall pick Jamarcus Russel

#22 overall pick Brady Quinn

#40 overall pick John Beck

#43 overall pick Drew Stanton

#92 overall pick Trent Edwards

#103 overall pick Isiah Stanback

#151 overall pick Jeff rowe

#174 overall pick Troy Smith

#205 overall pick Jordan Palmer

You forgot Kevin Kolb ,who was drafted by the Eagles in the second rd.

Romo not drated

Kyle Orton 4th rd.

Jake Delhomme not drafted

Jeff Garcia not drafted

Kurt Warner not drafted.

Marc Bulger 6 rd draft choice.

Matt Hasselback 6 rd.

Tom Brady 6 rd.

Derek Anderson 6 rd.

Sage Rosnfels 4th rd.

Matt Schaub 3rd rd.

David Garrard 4th rd.

Matt Cassel 7th rd. Some very good QBs drafted or not drafted after 3rd rd. Plus Brady Quinn will be starting this year for somebody. Teams are ready to offer Cleveland a first for him. Matt Millan was the only G.M. who thought Stanton was worth a second round draft choice.