Why Mike Doesn’t Give a Rat’s Ass About Your Bandwagon Opinion on John Beck

[OuterBanksTarHeel]

Hey OBTH. Don't know why you took offense to my reply or what your problem with OF's posts (and I assume other threads) is, but chill out willya? I was just saying that bumping this if Rex starts (which actually is pretty likely) doesn't refute the point of the OP. No need to hang me me out like I'm some cheese-eating high school boy. Sheesh.

I'm just not buying this notion that someone starts a thread like this with honest intentions--to simply remind people of such a captain obvious point--"coaches don't care what message board posters think." Really, duh. This reeks of passive-aggressiveness.

If we're going to be honest about this here, it would seem that there's more to the OP, such as the writer's preference for John Beck over Rex Grossman. Nothing wrong with that, but just be honest about it. "Grossman will start if Beck isn't 'ready'"=as if Beck were a 22 year-old rookie and not a 29 year old former practice squad player acquired in a trade for Doug Dutch. As if someone is really a "bandwagoneer" or whatever because he doesn't inflate the HC's praise of one of his QB's in the media. As if MS has actually ever said anything that would give Grossman supporters a reason to question the chances for their "guy" in the first place.

[Oldfan]

You also said that given the circumstances, Marc Bulger could've had the same Hall of Fame career that Tom Brady has had, and that Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are overrated and don't do anything special and that it's just the system around them.

Yeah, I'd say your scouting skills were shot, sir.

Except that you have misrepresented my opinions on Brady and Manning. I never said that they "don't do anything special and that it's just the system around them," you are essentially correct.

What you have shown is that I hold opinions on QBs contrary to the bandwagon opinions and that you are pretty much hard core bandwagon.

[zoony]

I disagree with the notion that bandwagon opinions are based on a college QB's support structure.

What about Grossman when he came out of college? Despite setting records at Florida and doing nothing but winning, there were serious questions about his ability to play at the next level. Same with other QB's like Danny Wuerffel and most recently, Greg McElroy.

Both won and set records, yet were low prospects coming out. Seems to me that the "bandwagon" doesn't take into account a QB's support structure the way you think it does.

[Oldfan]

When it comes to your stance with this organization. You usually do not have much nice to say about this team.

I always gave Mike credit for knowing QBs. And, he made the kind of roster moves this offseason that I was complaining he should have done in 2010. Why would I not feel better about his regime now?

[#98QBKiller]

Anything is possible but some Redskins fans act like this guy is franchise QB material and his track record in the NFL at this point disagrees with that.

[paulb3rd]

The truth is none of us can see what Mike sees in Beck because we are not in the film room, meetings, and practices with him. We are all speculating and judging from a few games he played in Miami many moons ago as a rookie. Until he steps on the field for a few games, we have no way to assess him.

[gortiz]

Mike worked with Joe Montana. The bandwagon opinion of Joe coming out of college was that he projected to be a backup QB at best. The bandwagon opinion now is that Montana might be the best of all time.

I just punched a total stranger in the face

... :point2sky

[Oldfan]

I disagree with the notion that bandwagon opinions are based on a college QB's support structure.

What about Grossman when he came out of college? Despite setting records at Florida and doing nothing but winning, there were serious questions about his ability to play at the next level. Same with other QB's like Danny Wuerffel and most recently, Greg McElroy.

Both won and set records, yet were low prospects coming out. Seems to me that the "bandwagon" doesn't take into account a QB's support structure the way you think it does.

I'll grant that the bandwagon can make some very obvious observations on the tangibles, like a QB's lack of velocity or the fact that his team had a very strong running game, and so on. But these are the exceptions, not the rule.

[Bang]

Good post OF.

If Grossman outplays him, we'll see what happens.

~Bang

[KCClybun]

Except that you have misrepresented my opinions on Brady and Manning. I never said that they "don't do anything special and that it's just the system around them," you are essentially correct.

What you have shown is that I hold opinions on QBs contrary to the bandwagon opinions and that you are pretty much hard core bandwagon.

I don't think it's a "bandwagon opinion" that a guy like Tom Brady is altogether a better quarterback than Marc Bulger, whether you're looking at him from a scouting perspective or not. Tom Brady's accomplishments are greater (three Super Bowl rings, 2 Super Bowl MVP's, 6 Pro Bowls, 2 NFL MVPs to Bulger's no rings and 2 Pro Bowls), his pedigree and accomplishments coming out off college were better, he's got a better arm than Bulger, he's more fundamentally sound than Bulger, he's done significantly more than Bulger with signficantly less (Brady never had Faulk in the backfield and Bruce and Holt outside in their prime).

The term "bandwagon" implies that you like/don't like something because the crowd like/don't like him. I've formed my own opinions on Brady by watching him play, just like I've formed my own opinions on Marc Bulger by watching him play. As I've formed my own opinions on Beck based on watching him play. I don't think you'll find many people here that are "jumping on the bandwagon" for disliking Beck. There are legitimate reasons to like and not like him. And you're right, Mike doesn't care what we think. He shouldn't. He's the coach.

But to essentially brush off all criticism of Beck as "bandwagon thinking" is false. Most of us are grown men and women who have been watching football most of our lives, and some of us study the game intently. So before you lump in people who don't love Beck in as "bangwagon jumpers", maybe you should look at some of the legit criticisms of him that people have of him.

[darrelgreenie]

Im my opinion many in this forum and fans at large are base their (strong and loud) opinions upon media perception.

Media perception is generally made up of a cross between whimsy and speculation of other non-professional media memebers much more then being based on actual evaluation.

[Oldfan]

I don't think it's a "bandwagon opinion" that a guy like Tom Brady is altogether a better quarterback than Marc Bulger, whether you're looking at him from a scouting perspective or not. Tom Brady's accomplishments are greater (three Super Bowl rings, 2 Super Bowl MVP's, 6 Pro Bowls, 2 NFL MVPs to Bulger's no rings and 2 Pro Bowls), his pedigree and accomplishments coming out off college were better, he's got a better arm than Bulger, he's more fundamentally sound than Bulger, he's done significantly more than Bulger with signficantly less (Brady never had Faulk in the backfield and Bruce and Holt outside in their prime).

Your argument proves that you cannot separate the QB from his support system. Every “accomplishment” you give Brady credit for, including the Pro Bowl selections, is strongly influenced by team accomplishments.

As for your observation on their tangibles, reading them, I can't believe you ever saw either QB play.

But to essentially brush off all criticism of Beck as "bandwagon thinking" is false. Most of us are grown men and women who have been watching football most of our lives, and some of us study the game intently. So before you lump in people who don't love Beck in as "bangwagon jumpers", maybe you should look at some of the legit criticisms of him that people have of him.

Would you like to list your “legit criticisms” that cause you to doubt Mike Shanahan’s judgment on Beck?

[OuterBanksTarHeel]

For someone who admonishes others for their supposed rigidness (re: others' inability to separate the QB from the system), you sure are rigid yourself. One would think, after reading your posts, that the QB is a mere cog in a machine.

You're not even saying anything, really, by pointing out to us that QB's play with 10 other guys instead of taking on 11 defenders by themselves.

Also, what's the deal with referring to coaches by their first names? I usually only use someone's first name if I could actually drink beer with them.

[Oldfan]

For someone who admonishes others for their supposed rigidness (re: others' inability to separate the QB from the system), you sure are rigid yourself. One would think, after reading your posts, that the QB is a mere cog in a machine.

You're not even saying anything, really, by pointing out to us that QB's play with 10 other guys instead of taking on 11 defenders by themselves.

Also, what's the deal with referring to coaches by their first names? I usually only use someone's first name if I could actually drink beer with them.

This post levels three more objections to add to the previous dozen you offered. I'm getting the distinct impression that you don't like my post.

[Hitman21ST]

Coming in late to the convo, but great OP Oldfan. I agree 100%. I did, however, skip from the OP to page 5, so I just have one question: was this more in support of John Beck or just saying that is going to decide on his QB, media be damned?

[Mahons21]

I'd say the exact same argument can be used for either QB we have, the fact that you single out only John Beck and leave out Grossman is an indication of your personal preference.

[Oldfan]

Coming in late to the convo, but great OP Oldfan. I agree 100%. I did, however, skip from the OP to page 5, so I just have one question: was this more in support of John Beck or just saying that is going to decide on his QB, media be damned?

Although aimed specifically at members, it was a condemnation of bandwagon opinions on QBs in general and in support of Mike's courage and good sense to ignore the criticism.

[Hitman21ST]

Although aimed specifically at members, it was a condemnation of bandwagon opinions on QBs in general and in support of Mike's courage and good sense to ignore the criticism.

Gotcha, thanks.

I'd say the exact same argument can be used for either QB we have, the fact that you single out only John Beck and leave out Grossman is an indication of your personal preference.

Not too sure about that. I think he singled out Beck because Beck is the most "controversial" QB on our roster - the one the talking heads will ***** about the most if we start him

[scruffylookin]

Not sure what the QBs listed has anything to do with the overall point.

Joe Montana was acquired, blossomed, became an NFL MVP and 4 time World Champion and 3 time Super Bowl MVP BEFORE Mike Shanahan went to San Francisco. He "worked" with Montana for one year. A year in which Montana was hurt until he came back to play in the Regular Season finale of 1992 in a defacto farewell game for the fans. Not sure how Joe Montana and Mike Shanahan get put together.

Steve Young was acquired by SF in 1987. Shanahan got there in 92. Young showed flashes before Shanahan got there and had a coming out season in 1991. He was not viewed as a bust by any measure when Shanahan got there in 92. So credit Walsh for seeing the potential in Young after the mess in Tampa.

Elway "couldn't win the big one" while Mike was there the first time. He was a WR coach in 84, the Offensive Coordinator in 85-87 and the quarterbacks coach 89-91. Maybe he learned from that time in Denver to construct the ZBS to compliment Elway when he returned in 1995 or perhaps what he learned is that he shouldn't rely too much on the quarterback after doing so the first time around in Denver.

Also don't forget Brian Griese was supposed to be "the guy" after Elway in Denver. Didn't work out so well and the brought on the trade for Plummer. Why couldn't Beck be Griese? A guy Shanahan may see something in but never amounts to anything?

Or how about Jay Schroeder and Steve Buerline in LA with the Raiders? Neither quite worked out for the Raiders and both were mediocre under Shanahan.

So I guess the take away is Mike Shanahan has had a long career in the NFL and has worked with lots of quarterbacks. He's worked with good ones and not so good ones. Is that it? What is the point of the thread again? Oh yeah, people have doubts about Beck so lets just have a bit of fun by creating a thread goofing on "group think". Okay then. Success.:thumbsup:

[Mahons21]

Not too sure about that. I think he singled out Beck because Beck is the most "controversial" QB on our roster - the one the talking heads will ***** about the most if we start him

Both of our QB's are controversial, and the media is going to ***** an exorbitant amount either way, and I've read more than one post from OF on this topic, he favors Beck over Grossman.

[Oldfan]

I'd say the exact same argument can be used for either QB we have, the fact that you single out only John Beck and leave out Grossman is an indication of your personal preference.

Wrong. Mike Shanahan hasn't put himself out on a limb for Rex as he has for John Beck. So, he has no reason to be that concerned with the bandwagon opinion.

I favor Beck over Grossman, but that's not relevant to the point made in the OP.

[pjfootballer]

Good post Scruffy!

[OuterBanksTarHeel]

This post levels three more objections to add to the previous dozen you offered. I'm getting the distinct impression that you don't like my post.

Correct. I'm not a fan of posters who slap some passive-aggressive label on others in the OP. It means that the poster is actually more interested in insulting people rather than engaging them in a discussion.

[ddub52]

Mike worked with Donovan McNabb. The bandwagon opinion was that Donovan choked under pressure and couldnt win the big games... Now Mcnabb is a Viking

[Mahons21]

Wrong. Mike Shanahan hasn't put himself out on a limb for Rex as he has for John Beck. So, he has no reason to be that concerned with the bandwagon opinion.

Band-wagon opinion of either QB is poor, depending on who he starts (actions not words) he'll be going out on a limb for either QB. In addition it's been largely speculated that MS gave Beck glowing reviews, to show Grossman and his agent the Redskins were serious about starting him if Rex didnt' come back.

Personally I believe, who the HC chooses to start at QB is a better indication of a coach's preference--or who he may be more willing to go out on a limb for. Rather than taking a few quotes during an odd off-season and using those quotes to create an assumption of who the HC prefers (will go out on a limb for).

Actions not words, are what is important here. If MS starts Rex at QB, he'll be going out on a limb much more so than he ever did for Beck, by saying "he liked Beck when he was coming out of college," or "he believes Beck can be a starting QB" etc.