Patrick vs. Eli

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 1:49 pm

All he said was that Henson's time in baseball doesn't tell you anything about how he will fare in the NFL.

I think that is a fair statement.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 2:28 pm

exactly. i never said henson has no idea what to do on the football field- i'm aware he has experience. but you attempted to use his baseball experience as a reason he would be more "seasoned", which is silly.

all you baseball lovers can go on and on about how "athletic" the game is, but you're kidding yourselves. welch, everything you said goes right along with what i stated- you have to have good reflexes. reflexes do not alone constitute athleticism. what's so hard to understand about that?

you're getting so defensive- i never said that an infielder's skills aren't impressive (even though baseball is boring and pointless), just that they are incomparable to the athleticism of an NFL QB. you speak as if every 5 seconds a 100mph line drive is coming right at the 3rd baseman, when in reality this probably occurs once every hour or so.
additionally, your analogy of "40 gut" is irrelevant, that is a running play. how about reading the defense and throwing on a 3 or 4 WR pattern? again, that means keeping track of 21 other players, not 6. and the basic routes may be predescribed for that individual play, but the defense may dictate adjustments, "hot reads", etc that the QB must be aware of.

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:06 pm

Eli is and will be the Balcksheep of the family, mark my words.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:12 pm

If we were talking about a soccer player trying out as a punter, I'd throw my lot in with PrimeTime.
The problem is, we ain't - so I can't.
Drew Henson is an enigma wrapped up in a riddle. Nobody knows if he can get it done on this level. He certainly has the pedigree.
In time, he may wind up being the best third baseman ever to play for the Cowboys.

Maybe Deion can come back and teach Drew how to be a two-sport star !

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 5:54 pm

dcd, you really are out of your league again (if you'll excuse the pun)!

By the way welch, I think that Henson in college was placed as potentially a lot better than Brady from the same school. Did Jansen not also play with him and say he could have been very good when he came out early?

This kid has a lot of NFL experience to catch up on but while he may be a project I think he's a better risk than that RB Buffalo took after that knee injury.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 6:02 pm

SkinsJock wrote:This kid has a lot of NFL experience to catch up on but while he may be a project I think he's a better risk than that RB Buffalo took after that knee injury.

You mean the kid that is now there starting running back (last 4 games) with a 3.6 ypc avg. :?:

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 6:09 pm

Sorry 1niksder! I am just v. surprised that he is able to play after that injury. I guess my point is that if the skills are still there the pukes may have a decent prospect.

Back to the topic. I think that the gints may have been forced to put him in a little early but like us they want to get the project going.

If LA gets back and we have both ST and LA back there and with a very bad attitude after what looks like happening these next 2 games, this could be a interesting match up.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 6:27 pm

SkinsJock wrote:Sorry 1niksder! I am just v. surprised that he is able to play after that injury. I guess my point is that if the skills are still there the pukes may have a decent prospect.

Yeah I figured he'd play but not this soon for the Bills
As for Eli I think a whole year on the bench would have been better for his progression but he is needed now. With the schedule that NY has over the next few weeks (Blitz Happy Defenses) Eli gives them a better chance.

Now Hensen is really in a better position because he's not being thrown in there. I'm sure they plan on playing him sometime this year, he doesn't to go in now because the other guy can't get the ball downfield (Brunell) or he can't get out of the way of the pass rush (Warner).

None of this is new for Ramsey so that will be a plus for him, I think he'll be find even against Illy. Eli will have problems for a few weeks

welch · Post by **welch** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 7:01 pm

all you baseball lovers can go on and on about how "athletic" the game is, but you're kidding yourselves. welch, everything you said goes right along with what i stated- you have to have good reflexes. reflexes do not alone constitute athleticism. what's so hard to understand about that?

Without reflexes, you are a weightlifter. Reflexes and thinking faster than the game are the things without which nothing else matters in sports. Yes, you can take steroids and lift weights. Big deal.

Reflexes and game sense are what Henson demonstrated in the Yankees organization. No, he couldn't hit, but neither can most people.

You think baseball is four hours of standing around? Maybe in bar-league softball, but not in the majors.

Come to Yankee Stadium next year. I invite you -- seriously. I'll try to locate ANT and TC, and we can get box seats down close enough that you can watch Derek Jeter, ARod, Posada, and the outfielders.

Sure, it looks easy when Bernie Williams runs down a fly ball. Watch the pitch up-close, watch the ball hit, and try to judge the drive the way Williams does.

For throwing, take a baseball and play catch. Then come to the Stadium and watch the outfielders loosen up between innings. Watch the throws they make just leaning back, no running start, just leaning back to drill a ball two hundred feet on a dead line exactly where they want it.

Reflexes and game sense. We don't know if Ramsey can do it, but we think so, and we hope. Sonny Jugenson was about the worst looking athlete ever, except maybe for Billy Kilmer. Joe T, as a rookie, saw them arrive at camp and says he thought, "Here come a pair of fat, drunken, derelicts who got lost".

Jurgenson was the best QB in the NFL in the last 40 years, with number two not even close. He had the quickest release, and the best game-sense: Sonny thought out the game about three seconds faster than anyone else on the field. How does Sonny fit your definition of "athleticism"?

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 7:08 pm

I think you're right on all 3!

I think fat boy is holding back because of certain teams they are playing in the near future and he does not need to pup him in those situations just yet.

I also think that both of the other teams felt that the time had come. If the gints have any hopes for the playoffs and beyond it has got to be with EM!

With us? Well we're about to see and against 2 pretty good defenses!

You never know! There have been some strange goings on for a while now and maybe the running game gets it going and this enables some downfield passes, holy tidal wave! Then we get the rookie rattled in Pittsburgh (why would you name a burgh the pits?)!

Now for some really far out thinking - we're 5-6 and playing the gints - AT HOME!

Back to reality, we're 3-8 0r 4-7 and needing a win badly!

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 10:28 pm

SkinsJock wrote:
By the way welch, I think that Henson in college was placed as potentially a lot better than Brady from the same school. Did Jansen not also play with him and say he could have been very good when he came out early?

Halfway there, SJ. Henson was not only called potentially better than Brady...he put Brady on the bench!!!

That's right, Tom Brady fell down to the sixth round in the draft because he was benched at the University of Michigan by a young QB named Drew Henson. And people did believe back then that Brady was a damn good QB...he slipped because people wondered why he got benched by Henson...even though Henson played quite well.

The point is, do not bash the kid just because he went and played baseball...which is still a tough sport to play.

This guy is a lot better than Chad Hutchinson could ever hope to be.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 10:51 pm

Primetime42 wrote:The point is, do not bash the kid just because he went and played baseball...which is still a tough

No one is bashing him because he played baseball, but merely pointing out that his time in baseball doesn't really tell us anything about his future performance in the NFL. The truth is, there are lots of really good college QBs that don't amount to squat in the NFL for various reasons. Until Henson gets in a game and shows what he's got, he is an unknown entity with potential.

I don't understand why you are so sensitive about it!

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Sat Nov 20, 2004 11:35 pm

cvillehog wrote:
Primetime42 wrote:The point is, do not bash the kid just because he went and played baseball...which is still a tough

No one is bashing him because he played baseball, but merely pointing out that his time in baseball doesn't really tell us anything about his future performance in the NFL. The truth is, there are lots of really good college QBs that don't amount to squat in the NFL for various reasons. Until Henson gets in a game and shows what he's got, he is an unknown entity with potential.

NI don't understand why you are so sensitive about it!

I personally am just sick of people jumping to conclusions. I never once called him a franchise QB. He has the potential to be one, but of course potential means nothing.

It's just been a while since Arrington murdered Aikman, you know? :oops:

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:52 am

hey look, it's possible henson will become a great NFL QB and ruin the lives of skins fans for many years to come. just saying that his baseball experience is not going to tell us anything, or contribute to his performance in the NFL.

if anything, i feel it tells us that his heart isn't really entirely in football, which would be catastrophic for a QB. i mean, how could someone possibly choose baseball over football??? there's no way i want that person lining up behind center on my team.

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:14 pm

die cowboys die wrote:hey look, it's possible henson will become a great NFL QB and ruin the lives of skins fans for many years to come. just saying that his baseball experience is not going to tell us anything, or contribute to his performance in the NFL.

if anything, i feel it tells us that his heart isn't really entirely in football, which would be catastrophic for a QB. i mean, how could someone possibly choose baseball over football??? there's no way i want that person lining up behind center on my team.

He didn't necessarily CHOOSE baseball over football.

He was a sophmore at Michigan when the Yankees drafted him. Now, remember the code of the N-C-Double-Assholes; The players can't make money for themselves.

Imagine being a collegiate sophmore who is awesome at both sports he plays, but he will get millions if you commit to one for the time being. I think you would consider it, wouldn't you?

Henson actually thought he could get away with playing both games, but of course, the Yanks forbade it, so he felt obliged to honor his contract.

He just couldn't hit a curveball, and the rest is history.

I honestly do NOT question this guy's heart. He's playing the sport he loves, but you just watch and see. He'll prove it :wink:

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:32 pm

Ask Bo Jackson or Deion Sanders if baseball requires athleticism. Bottom line, an unathletic individual can not play thrid base at the professional level.

What this boils down to, again, is a Cowboys-Redskins spitting match.

Everyone ask yourselves this: If you could trade Ramsey for Henson straight up, would you?

It's a tough question, but I would honestly rather have Henson. His three years out of the game hurts, but is it a lot worse than two years of mediocrity and getting your head beaten in?

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:57 pm

Everyone ask yourselves this: If you could trade Ramsey for Henson straight up, would you?

no. not only has ramsey not sat out that long, but he's also that much farther ahead in the pro game.... My 2 cents

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:29 pm

Got to Go with HS666 on this one

You don't know what you're getting with Henson,
(a)he's been away from the game for awhile
(b) he hasn't faced any live fire
(c) the same amount of time he's been back tring to get familar with the NFL, Ramsey has been Re learning his craft

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:33 pm

hailskins666 wrote:no. not only has ramsey not sat out that long, but he's also that much farther ahead in the pro game....

If I am trying to win a game tomorrow, I would agree with you. But looking long term, Ramsey hasn't really showed he has the consisteny to be good starter in this league. Granted, Henson hasn't shown that either, but at this point, I think he has a higher cieling than Ramsey.

Then again, I thought signing Brunell was a great move, so what do I know...

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:47 pm

Steve Spurrier III wrote:If I am trying to win a game tomorrow, I would agree with you. But looking long term, Ramsey hasn't really showed he has the consisteny to be good starter in this league. Granted, Henson hasn't shown that either, but at this point, I think he has a higher cieling than Ramsey.

Then again, I thought signing Brunell was a great move, so what do I know...

Joe Gibbs is always trying to win the next game so Henson would be any help to us. Ramsey has won in this league whereas Henson hasn't even played.

I thought signing Brunell was a great move also.... :shock:

what were we thinking

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:55 pm

1niksder wrote:Joe Gibbs is always trying to win the next game so Henson would be any help to us.

And as he should. A coach should always try to win the game in front of him.

But from the perspective of a general manager, you have to be willing to sacrifice some talent immediatley for talent long term.

For instance, if the Cowboys could only keep one quarterback, should they keep Testaverde or Henson? Testaverde gives them a better chance to win the next game they play, but obviously Henson has much more long-term value.

And that was my question. I would definetly rather have Ramsey starting this Sunday against the Eagles than Drew Henson, but looking long-term, I'm not so sure...

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:11 pm

Agreed
Looking long term That team in Texas will be better of with Henson over Vinny.

But in a head to head trade I'd have to go with Ramsey over Henson due to what I've seen from the two of them. Ramsey outplayed both QBs taken before him in the 1st round the year that he came out with less talent then the team has now. Again we'd be basing any potential success of Henson on what he did in college 3 years ago.

:-k

Your last post said a lot.... with a GM would we be having this conversation :?:

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:37 pm

SSIII,
You are taking the statements too far. Did anyone say Henson was "unathletic"? No.

I think everyone can agree (if we can get past the silly semantics), that the past three years have shown us nothing about Henson's NFL potential.

The only reason you could percieve that Henson has a bigger upside than Ramsey at this point is because Heson is a total unknown entity, whereas Ramsey has 16 starts and you've seen him attempt to adjust to the pro game.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 3:09 pm

cvillehog wrote:I think everyone can agree (if we can get past the silly semantics), that the past three years have shown us nothing about Henson's NFL potential.

The only reason you could percieve that Henson has a bigger upside than Ramsey at this point is because Heson is a total unknown entity, whereas Ramsey has 16 starts and you've seen him attempt to adjust to the pro game.

But I don't understand this perception....
Henson is a UNKNOWN ENTITY ( he could be worst than Vinny, Carter and Hutchinson combined)
whereas Ramsey (throwing out this years stats)
he has played in 20 games started 16 is 196 of 564 comp/att for 3705 yards (52% comp rate) and td/int is 23/17 that gives him a passer rating of 73.8

I would take that over potential anyday

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Sun Nov 21, 2004 4:25 pm

1niksder wrote:
cvillehog wrote:I think everyone can agree (if we can get past the silly semantics), that the past three years have shown us nothing about Henson's NFL potential.

The only reason you could percieve that Henson has a bigger upside than Ramsey at this point is because Heson is a total unknown entity, whereas Ramsey has 16 starts and you've seen him attempt to adjust to the pro game.

But I don't understand this perception....
Henson is a UNKNOWN ENTITY ( he could be worst than Vinny, Carter and Hutchinson combined)
whereas Ramsey (throwing out this years stats)
he has played in 20 games started 16 is 196 of 564 comp/att for 3705 yards (52% comp rate) and td/int is 23/17 that gives him a passer rating of 73.8

I would take that over potential anyday

I agree with you, as would anyone who isn't a fan of the Cowboys, I would think.