This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel.
Yes they are...Staubach, Plunkett, Testaverde, Newton, and Palmer are the only ones that were or are any good with Newton and Palmer and Bradford being pretty inconsistent overall. Most of his career Plunkett stunk and the jury is out on Winston.
Odds are historically speaking a Hiesman winning QB will be bad and not have a good career...and will not win a superbowl.
What about Spurrier? Are you saying the Titans are willing to get rid of Mariota?
Jim Plunkett stunK?????
Hey, this is getting to sound like your own personal opinion and of course everything we discuss on this board is only just that but you don't like Spurrier and you put him down, you don't like Mariota and you put him down.
Hey, you made a statement that was a broad OVERstatement which was Heisman Quarterbacks stink therefore if one follows the logic of that statement then if a QB is a Heisman winner, pass on him but if he is a Heisman runner up or not even in the running for Heisman, grab him.
Spurrer was a sub par pro QB...as a coach well, different story. Marriota has been mid pack at best although he does have time to turn it around. Yes, Plunkett stunk at every stop prior to his arrival in Oakland where he was very successful for a whopping three of his 15 seasons, so yes he was mostly bad and posted a losing record in nine of his 15 seasons. The only player I used the word stunk on was Plunkett, who got kicked off of two of his three teams. And yes if you look at the careers, playoffs, and championships Hiesman winning QB overall are usually not very good and not successful. Not just my opinion.
LOL, you do know Bob Griese came within votes of being the Heisman?
So LOL, I guess it was a great thing for us that he lost.
Maybe you were just tongue in cheek when you said that a Heisman winner is cursed to be a failure in the pros....or was it just when that winner was a QB? Some of those rbs didn't have too bad of a career.
Just quarterbacks who win the hiesman, the failure rate with them is much different than with other positions.
Now I am convinced that this is mostly due to Hiesman winning Quarterbacks being drafted by the very worst of teams. It is interesting that overwhelmingly if you win that trophy you will be a pro failure and will never go to, much less win a title.
Yes, lucky for us Bob didn't win...which gave him the chance to actually be good.
> Just quarterbacks who win the hiesman, the failure
> rate with them is much different than with other
> Now I am convinced that this is mostly due to
> Hiesman winning Quarterbacks being drafted by the
> very worst of teams. It is interesting that
> overwhelmingly if you win that trophy you will be
> a pro failure and will never go to, much less win
> a title.
> Yes, lucky for us Bob didn't win...which gave him
> the chance to actually be good.
Boom. Exactly Ken. Not everyone, but generally the best players go to the worst teams. Does it mean failure? Of course not.....but it makes it a bunch more difficult to succeed for sure.