Originally Posted by
Jsteve01
Kinger
I think it's fair to ask why UCLA was a pretty good football team until Rosen got there. And went downhill after he arrived. And it's pretty easy to take a look at the starters in the league from last year and evaluate how many of those guys were good Collegiate players on good collegiate teams.
They went downhill because of him? They were pretty good several years before him - that much I remember. But, in regards to them going downhill because of him, no. He was a three year starter - in 2016, his middle year, he got hurt. They couldn't overcome that. So we're done to two years. Last year, so we're clear, you want to pin that on him? And the year before that, I believe they actually were a disappointment. So again, I hope that you're realizing that your arguments about the best draft prospect in the class are, well, horrible. But, because you bring up the point, and because I love you, I'll continue.
I don't care about winning in college because just about every Heisman did that, and most of those guys were busts. I don't care about winning because A.J. McCarron, who had/has an NFL caliber arm, was a great winner, and he wasn't a top flight prospect. You're comparing apples to oranges. The reason why the playoffs matter so much for Keenum is because a massive portion of the argument for him is 'look at how well he played last year'. Well, he shit he the bed in the playoffs, which is part of last year. Tebow, Young, Bush, Leinart, Dorsey, etc were all winners. Can you not think of great NFL players who didn't win in college? How many winners in college played at 'Bama and sucked or underachieved in the league?
I keep asking why it matters, and you can tell me why it's fair, but you can't show me what it proves. Or, what it suggests.