13b6198359cb@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:
> .
>
>>
>> > I thought
>> > maybe you could think alittle.
>>
>> I am. Clearly, you are not.
>>
>> > Use your commen sense,with out DF
>> > bias.You can't tell me what you think would be the results of the
>> > poll?
>>
>> Fine. You want a result?
>> 23% would agree with you.
>
> The funny part about this is I bet you believe this.Because you have a
> large amount of hate for DF,Because your RJ guy.
Thank you for missing part of the point.
My *result* was complete BS, just as yours would be.
>>> >> > No your bias is that you were a Rob Johnson guy.
>>
>> Typical Flutie Flake.
>> You are still unable to discuss Flutie's abilities WITHOUT bringing up
>> Rob Johnson.
>>
>
> Your saying im bias because im a Flake.But mfer I can't say your bias
> about DF because of your man crush on RJ?That sounds very one sided to
> me.
I called you a Flake because you exhibit Flake like behavior.
Like a "Flake", you have this constant *need* to interject RJ into any
discussion regarding Flutie.
Like a "Flake", your perceived value of Flutie is a direct inverse
relationship to RJ. The more RJ sucked, the better DF becomes.
Like a "Flake", when somebody disagrees with your position on the value of
Flutie, you automatically assume the other person must be a "Rob Johnson
guy".
Rob Johnson was/is a POS QB.
Doug Flutie was an average American QB.
But in your little world, that makes me an RJ guy.
Whatever.
>> > > > He was never givin the shot to be the man on
>> > any team.
>>
>> Yes he was, more than once on different teams.
>> In 1985, he was given the starting QB position for Generals prior to the
>> start of the season.
>> In 1999, he was awarded the starting QB position for the Buffalo Bills
>> prior to the start of the season.
>> In 2001, he signed on with the San Diego Chargers, and was given the
>> starting QB position prior to the start of the season.
>
> Being the man and being name the starter is totaly different things.Do
> you know this?JP Losman was named the starter last year but the team
> went out and drafted a QB.
Edwards was a value pick. Nothing more. The Bills organization even
admitted to such.
JP was given/awarded the starting QB position in 2006.
JP was awarded the starting QB postion in 2007.
Edwards was not drafted with the intention of replacing JP.
This situation is different from Flutie's situation. In each of DF cases,
each team went looking for a replacement on purpose.
>>
>> In all 3 cases, every team by the end of the year was looking to bench
>> his *.
>>
>
> The Bears was at the start of his career.
Irrelevant. Ditka thought so highly of Flutie, he chose DF to start the
playoff game over established players Fuller and Tomczak.
However, a completion rate of 36% can make a person regret that decision.
> The Bills benched him because
> of RJ.It wasn't because of his play on the field!
It wasn't? Then why did they bench him? It seems to me, if Flutie was as
good as you claim, the Bills organization would not have been "dazzled" by
RJ's "potential".
> The two years before
> that he was in the playoffs.The last year RJ got to be the starter and
> the season went to *. By the end on the year DF had taken back the
> starting job.If Wade Phillips wasn't fired DF would have been the QB
> the next year.
So, he still wasn't good enough to convince the new organization he was the
better option?
(Hint: That's a clue)
>
> The chargers LMAO!That was one of the worst talented teams in the
> NFL,I ever seen.Drew Brees and LT couldn't even help that team win
> games.Drew Brees was almost ran out of the NFL with the lack of talent
> around him.
No, Drew Brees was the reason Brees was almost run out of the NFL.
But here is something to mull over.
As a rookie, Brees did get significant playing time in one game.
That game was in week 9, vs. the KC Chiefs.
Brees took over for an injured Fluite (concussion).
The Chargers lost, but here's Brees production:
Completion: 56%
TD: 1
INT: 0
QB Rating: 94
Fluties production:
Completion: 38%
TD: 0
INT: 1
QB Rating: 23
But does this tell the whole story?
No. Flutie's INT led to a score by KC.
When Brees took over, the Chargers were down 19-0. Brees led the Chargers
to 20 unanswered points to take the lead 20-19.
The Chargers eventually lost in the 4th quarter.
Ouch. Flutie was drastically out played by a rookie.
>>
>> If Flutie was as good as you "claim" he was, the teams would NOT be
>> looking for another QB to replace him.
>
> Thank you for making my point for me.He is 5,9 and does not have a
> strong arm.
Interesting. Earlier, I said a weakness of Flutie's was his weak arm. You
disgreed. Now you agree.
But to continue ...
> Grass is always greener thing.No one stuck with him.What
> the team didn't understand is that DF was winning games with bad
> teams.They thought they had a good team just needed a good QB.
I disagree. I do not think a team that had gone 1-15 one year, then 5-11
the next year has any disillusion of how good they were. I seriously doubt
the Chargers thought they were a "QB" away from being a winner.
Personally, I think all the teams realized Flutie had some limitations that
could not be hidden or overcome.
>> Also, Flutie did start in two playoff games, and lost them both.
>
> Yes.If he had the chance to be the man with one team,He would have
> made the playoffs more times.He would have won playoff games believe
> it or not.
> He only had 2 shots at it.
And both times made seriously costly mistakes.
> You go from the 80's to the 90's to the playoffs to regular season
> games.
Clue: from 1990 to 1997, Flutie went to this country called "Canada", and
played in a league called the "Canadian Football League". And believe it or
not, that is different style of game, and cannot be compared to the
American game.
That would be like trying to compare the IRL to NASCAR.
> Your all over the place finding his worst games.
That's because his faults are not limited to any particular time or
instance. Flutie has * up, and * up royally through out his
career in the American game.
> You can base
> everything you want on any stat you come up with.
And you still have your imaginary poll ...
> I watched the games.
> I
> seen DF play.
So have I. Did you ever notice the way Flutie's field vision narrows when
he scrambles? And this explains why Flutie had a tendency to throw balls
into double and triple coverage while players on the other side of the
field were WIDE open? (Note: this is more prevelent when he runs right).
Did you notice how defenses changed schemes by the end of 1998 and through
1999? They started to stack the line, which takes away the running game,
and puts more defenders in the short to intermediate passing zones. Instead
of rushing the passer, they played more contain, and plugged up the passing
lanes.
You saw how all of that tends to limit an offense?
> He won games with teams he had no right winning with.He
> made every team he played with better.
You know what? Average QB's can do the same thing when the other QB's are
below average or worse.
> The Bills looked like the worst
> team in the NFL when Todd Collins and RJ QBed the same team as
> DF.
Two terrible QB's.
> Teams that he took to the playoffs!Yes both of these guys
> sucked(Collins is decent now)but a average QB doesn't
> just fill in at QB and take one of the worst teams to one of the best
> teams.
The Bills were not one of the worst teams. As I had posted earlier, the
defense was stout, the running game was solid, and the WRs were Andre Reed
and Eric Moulds.
> You have to be above average to make that much of a change in a team
> by
> just starting with no change in the talent around you.
No it does not. If the other QB's are terrible (sucked, whatever), is it
not possible those QB's actually HINDERED the team?
> He is better then your average NFL QB.
So says your imaginary poll ...
Night
