Past QB question

[Elmgrovegnome]

Collin Cowherd posed a question and I really had to think on it.

He said how many college QBs that had character/immaturity issues ended up becoming good NFL QBs. He claimed none of them. I would say Cam Newton but I couldn't think of any others. But I have been known to have a terrible memory and it gets worse every year.





He also said that he believes that if you are given millions then you only become more of what you are and not likely to change. He cited that Russell Wilson was nice and now may be even nicer because he can afford to do nice things. He cited that Johnny Manziel was a campus partier and now that he has millions he has just become more of a partier that flies to Miami for a night and Vegas for a night.

Anyone have any opinions on this theory?

 

[Athos]

Heck, even Newton has a ways to go before living up to his hype/athleticism.

But I can't think of many if any. All the big name QBs, at least, coming into the game, didn't seem to have any huge character concerns.

 

[FrantikRam]

This is just my opinion, but I think things are just very overblown nowadays with all the social media and everything.

Peyton Manning: http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/dis...manning-had-his-own-sexual-misconduct-scandal

I also think John Elway and Eli Manning, refusing to play for teams, is a character issue in and of itself. Brett Favre had issues that I am certain would have been discussed and perhaps other stuff dug up if he went to college or as an early pro, had social media been like it is now.

I'd definitely say Brett and Peyton are legit examples of guys that were extremely successful in spite of questionable off the field issues.

 

[RaminExile]

Heck, even Newton has a ways to go before living up to his hype/athleticism.

But I can't think of many if any. All the big name QBs, at least, coming into the game, didn't seem to have any huge character concerns.

Yeah but the question is "good NFL QB" not - living up to the hype QB. I think he's a good QB. The fallacy with this quote from Cowherd is that there are not in fact many good QBs in the league. There are only about 10-15 at any one time. The rest are usually poor or average and franchises are continually turning guys over looking for the new QB. The fact is, its really difficult to find a good QB anyway, so when you just look at a handful with character concerns the odds are that they wouldn't become a "good QB" ANYWAY because the chances of finding a good QB are so slim.

 

[Boston Ram]

Johnny Manziel, Cam Newton, Vince Young, Ryan Mallett and Zach Mettenberger come to mind as modern day QB's. Truth is there are not that many good QB's and there are a lot of high character QB's who never panned out. Big Ben in Pittsburgh has had maturity issues in the NFL and has had a pretty good career. Plus some guys slip under the radar.

Where there maturity issues with Tony Romo, Kurt Warner or Matt Cassell? Hard to tell because nobody ever paid attention to them when they were in college.

In a perfect world you don't want the maturity issues but every athlete/person deals with them at some point in their life, its just when and how.

Hard for us to know because we don't get to sit across a table from them and talk to them about past discretions.

 

[dieterbrock]

I'm definitely of the belief that guys cant get away with anything anymore and that just because a guy didnt have a bad reputation doesnt mean he was clean.
I have a hard time thinking Ben Roethlisberger didnt become an a-hole until after he went pro
When Terry Bradshaw talks about his younger days, I'm sure it wouldnt be so PC

 

[Mackeyser]

Wasn't there an issue with Roethlisberger?

 

[Selassie I]

Dan Marino slipped in the draft because of his partying in college. The stories said he liked the white stuff.

How'd he turn out in the pros?

 

[Mackeyser]

 

[Memento]

Dan Marino slipped in the draft because of his partying in college. The stories said he liked the white stuff.

How'd he turn out in the pros?

I'll tell you a true story about the 80's Blues. Remember Doug Gilmour? Fantastic with Calgary. Led them to a Stanley Cup victory. He was drafted by the Blues originally. Became their team captain even. He ended up raping his daughter's teenaged baby-sitter. But you never heard about that outcry because it just wasn't a media sensation back then. And the judge in Calgary refused to bring an indictment against him because, hey, he was a fellow Canadian, and they just traded for him, the darling hero who was there to save their worthless franchise. Please do note the dripping sarcasm and incredibly bitter tone in this post.

You really think that Marino and Gilmour would have gotten away with that shit in this era of constant media and cameras everywhere? I highly doubt it. Gilmour would be in jail where he belongs, and Marino would have been suspended multiple times under the NFL's conduct policy.

Remember T.J. Oshie? He got nailed for partying and missing a practice because he was passed out and hung over. They raked him over the coals in the NHL and especially in St. Louis. You heard Blues "fans" in the Asylum (the PD Blues Talk nickname) screaming "Trade his sorry overrated ass!" and "Let him bang all of the girls in Detroit because that's all he's good for!" And uh, look at him now. That's absolutely nothing compared to what Gilmour did. Imagine if Gilmour raped a teenaged girl in this era.

That's why people like me question guys like Winston, Roethlisberger, and Peyton Manning.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Dan Marino slipped in the draft because of his partying in college. The stories said he liked the white stuff.

How'd he turn out in the pros?

Different era. Have you encountered any of the new generation that has joined the workforce? All a bunch of entitled immature lazy assholes. They think that it is fine to ignore the work they are paid to do and play on their phones.

I was impressed with Winston's meting with mooch but I was not impressed with his explanation for his shortcomings off the Imelda. He continued to say the past is the past and he is only looking forward. Sounds like avoiding the issues to me....sounds immature.

I have been a Winston guy all along but he is starting to scare me. After thinking about Collins comment and considering all of today's top QBs they all are standup guys except maybe Ben, who turned it around. Rogers, Brady, Manning, Manning, Romo, Wilson, Brees. I don't see that in Jameis right now. I see a guy with a gut (he said he loves to eat and that is what he oes in the offseason) who likes to goof around a lot, like filling McDonalds ketchup cups at the soda machine. He has some growing up to do. How do you tell if he will grow up or if he will eat himself out of the league.

 

[jrry32]

Different era. Have you encountered any of the new generation that has joined the workforce? All a bunch of entitled immature lazy assholes. They think that it is fine to ignore the work they are paid to do and play on their phones.

I was impressed with Winston's meting with mooch but I was not impressed with his explanation for his shortcomings off the Imelda. He continued to say the past is the past and he is only looking forward. Sounds like avoiding the issues to me....sounds immature.

I have been a Winston guy all along but he is starting to scare me. After thinking about Collins comment and considering all of today's top QBs they all are standup guys except maybe Ben, who turned it around. Rogers, Brady, Manning, Manning, Romo, Wilson, Brees. I don't see that in Jameis right now. I see a guy with a gut (he said he loves to eat and that is what he oes in the offseason) who likes to goof around a lot, like filling McDonalds ketchup cups at the soda machine. He has some growing up to do. How do you tell if he will grow up or if he will eat himself out of the league.

Sounds like a generalization.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Sounds like a generalization.

I would call it more of a trend and some day when you are hiring people you will know just what I am talking about......and no it isn't just me. I hear it from all walks of life. Nursing, auto mechanics, Carpentry, electricians etc,...I have read theories about it in Psychology magazines.

Maybe it's because my generation didn't have all the distractions that people do today! But for some reason many people think it is a right to use their phones at work. They claim it is for emergencies but that is an excuse. Kids grow up tech saavy and they need to keep up with technology but it is too much of a distraction. Workplaces have to ban cell phones except on breaks, Corporations track the websites being followed on computers and fire people for content and bandwidth violations. None of that would be necessary if people would just work. Then you get the cloud that think they don't need to earn a raise, they should just be making the highest pay grade because they are doing the same job. I could go on but I won't.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Sounds like a generalization.

That's a sound generalization.
FTFY

 

[jrry32]

Or it's because the older generations always want to bitch about the younger generations. Your generation wasn't immune either.

Like any generation, this one has lazy people, people with a solid work ethic, and people with a great work ethic. So claiming all are a bunch of entitled lazy immature assholes is a generalization...and not a sound one.

But as you're considering all the flaws of this new generation, keep in mind who raised them.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I know who is at fault. One root goes back to when both parents had careers and too many people began valuing money over family. Another factor is single parent child rearing. That can be through unwed mothers or dads that work so much that they are not involved with their children. Another reason is because of how prosperous our country was for so long. Parents got their kids whatever they needed and didn't make them earn it and then parents who can't afford allow themselves to be pressured into doing the Sam thing.

When I was in high school the only cars that weren't Pre owned beaters were fixed up by kids with their own effort and money or teachers owned them. Now if you driv by high schools half the cars are brand new and the rest are much newer and nicer than a high school could afford.

The kids want something and they get it. That goes on their entire lives andd they are conditioned to expect it. So when they get to the workforce they have trouble coping, expect rewards without earning them and think punishment is only idle threats not to be taken seriously.

Some parents still value discipline and make their kids work for what they get but the majority don't anymore because they are too caught up in their own lives.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Sounds like a generalization.

BTW when people talk about Generations, of course it is Generalizing.

 

[BadCompany]

I'll tell you a true story about the 80's Blues. Remember Doug Gilmour? Fantastic with Calgary. Led them to a Stanley Cup victory. He was drafted by the Blues originally. Became their team captain even. He ended up raping his daughter's teenaged baby-sitter. But you never heard about that outcry because it just wasn't a media sensation back then. And the judge in Calgary refused to bring an indictment against him because, hey, he was a fellow Canadian, and they just traded for him, the darling hero who was there to save their worthless franchise. Please do note the dripping sarcasm and incredibly bitter tone in this post.

Not quite true.

The Gilmour story was in fact a huge media sensation, and he was taunted throughout the league by fans of opposing teams in the following season. Gilmour himself has said it almost cost him his career. And the reason why he was traded from the Blues to the Flames was because of those stories. It was quite big news and a scandal.

Also, your sarcastic comment about Canadian judges overlooking a rape charge because of a hockey player coming to save the franchise? False. It was a Missouri grand jury that refused to indict Gilmour, which of course makes complete sense seeing as the alleged crime took place in Missouri. Why would a judge in a completely different country have any jurisdiction over a crime that occurred in the US?

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-12-28/news/mn-1123_1_grand-jury

It should also be noted that the lawyer who represented the family and teenaged babysitter was ARRESTED over this case (by St. Louis police) for fraud and attempted extortion. The Gilmours subsequently sued that lawyer and the girl's family for slander. The slander suits were later settled out of court in favor of the Gilmours.

 

[Memento]

Not quite true.

The Gilmour story was in fact a huge media sensation, and he was taunted throughout the league by fans of opposing teams in the following season. Gilmour himself has said it almost cost him his career. And the reason why he was traded from the Blues to the Flames was because of those stories. It was quite big news and a scandal.

Also, your sarcastic comment about Canadian judges overlooking a rape charge because of a hockey player coming to save the franchise? False. It was a Missouri grand jury that refused to indict Gilmour, which of course makes complete sense seeing as the alleged crime took place in Missouri. Why would a judge in a completely different country have any jurisdiction over a crime that occurred in the US?

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-12-28/news/mn-1123_1_grand-jury

It should also be noted that the lawyer who represented the family and teenaged babysitter was ARRESTED over this case (by St. Louis police) for fraud and attempted extortion. The Gilmours subsequently sued that lawyer and the girl's family for slander. The slander suits were later settled out of court in favor of the Gilmours.

You really think that Canada would allow a guy accused of raping a fourteen-year-old girl to cross into their country without a trial of their own or at the very least scrutinizing every little detail? That doesn't happen. That simply doesn't happen. The only reason he got to play for Calgary as the trial in the U.S. was still ongoing was because he was born in Canada and playing for a Canadian hockey team. As for their lawyer being arrested and all of those slander charges...you have absolutely zero idea how corrupt the entire St. Louis police and justice departments (city and county alike) really were/are. Money talks. Rapists (especially rich and famous ones) walk.

Gilmour should still be in prison, and I will never believe otherwise.

 

[BadCompany]

Under what law would they prevent Gilmour from coming back into the country? Note that Gilmour was never arrested for rape. In fact, that was largely the reason why the girl's lawyer was arrested; they never reported the alleged crime to the authorities, and instead went right to Gilmour asking for money to keep it quiet. When Gilmour refused they sued him, still never reporting it as a crime. Since of course the lawsuit made it very public a grand jury was convened to see if there was enough evidence to indict and arrest, and that grand jury decided there wasn't.

The accusation against Gilmour was not reported to authorities. In October, the grand jury indicted Richard E. Schwartz, an attorney for the girl's parents, and accused him of trying to obtain money from the Blues in exchange for his silence in the matter.

At no point could Canada prevent him from coming into the country. He had never been arrested, he was never charged, there was never a trial, and certainly not an ongoing one. There was a lawsuit, and as it turns out a fraudulent one at that, that was settled out-of-court.

Its cool. If you think Gilmour should still be in prison and/or that he only got off because of the corrupt St. Louis legal system then so be it. Can't be proven otherwise. I can only tell you what actually happened, which is he was never charged with a crime, never paid a dime in penalties for his actions, and was in fact compensated for the accusations made against him.