For those trashing Josh Rosen.....

do so because of his history of concussions. A few too many hits to the head and his career is over with. Otherwise, people have a lot of positive things to say about him.

The shoulder injuries. And that's just not enough to drop him below number one on my board.
p.s.--the concussions don't concern me at all.

Start and end with his injury history. Concussions and shoulder surgery. Losing enough games to "earn" #2 overall... I don't know if you want to take chances with that pick on someone whose career might be over before it gets off the ground.

is weird, stinks of bias. I like him, and if his medicals check out then make him a Giant. But to disregard them as nothing is ridiculous.

The only thing way off with people who don’t like Rosen are those citing character concerns. They seem so bogus to me. And now everything he says those same people claim he’s just trying to cover himself pre draft. Very strange.

constantly, get the message that most us do to want him at # 2 period.. But it will not be up to us, DG and Shurmur will make that call . He is injury prone, and is not somebody that would rather be playing FB rather than anything else, like Shurmur said he wants in his players.

1. His concussion
2. Milton's obsession

injury prone?

He had should surgery.

In comment 13830312 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

1. His concussion 2. Milton's obsession

1. Not concerned in the slightest.
2. Completely eliminates him from consideration.

but realistically, don't you have to assume every single guy in the draft has had a concussion or two or three?

In comment 13830319 81_Great_Dane said:

Quote:

but realistically, don't you have to assume every single guy in the draft has had a concussion or two or three?

Especially defensive positions such as linebacker, and even linemen. Any position with repetitive impacts.

a pure talent standpoint, I think he's the best player in the draft. I don't care about his comments. But the concussions are concerning, and probably disqualifying.

In comment 13830319 81_Great_Dane said:

Quote:

but realistically, don't you have to assume every single guy in the draft has had a concussion or two or three?

Are we supoosed to assume every player has missed a month of time and still couldn't play in a bowl game because of a concussion?

1. Concussions
2. He already has his after football business career planned out and is excited about it.

In comment 13830300 Milton said:

Quote:

The shoulder injuries. And that's just not enough to drop him below number one on my board. p.s.--the concussions don't concern me at all.

I wonder if they concern his father, the neurologist/spine surgeon.... That could be a factor down the line. Just sayin.

when evaluating players. It is a very real situation that needs to be taken into account when evaluating prospects and not just assuming everyone gets them. Eli should have made us all aware of the phrase, "the best ability is availability."
Link - ( New Window )

In comment 13830337 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

when evaluating players. It is a very real situation that needs to be taken into account when evaluating prospects and not just assuming everyone gets them. Eli should have made us all aware of the phrase, "the best ability is availability." Link - ( New Window )

Eli's an unfair example to put on anyone. The fact that he's never gotten hurt is some kind of blessing, not a standard that should be expected. It flies in the face of what the sport is that a guy can play 14 years and never get hurt.

In comment 13830339 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

In comment 13830337 robbieballs2003 said: Quote: when evaluating players. It is a very real situation that needs to be taken into account when evaluating prospects and not just assuming everyone gets them. Eli should have made us all aware of the phrase, "the best ability is availability." Link - ( New Window ) Eli's an unfair example to put on anyone. The fact that he's never gotten hurt is some kind of blessing, not a standard that should be expected. It flies in the face of what the sport is that a guy can play 14 years and never get hurt.

I don't get your point. You always do this. You love to play devil's advocate and cherry pick a comment. I never said any draft pick should be Eli in terms of health. I said Eli has shown is that health is very important. That is it.

In comment 13830288 JohnB said:

Quote:

do so because of his history of concussions. A few too many hits to the head and his career is over with. Otherwise, people have a lot of positive things to say about him.

This.

the highest competitors make their teammates better and when the outcome of the game is at its most perilous, that is when they play their best.

W-L record is just one important piece. It's not the only piece, it isn't everything, it isn't, by itself, a predictor of success or failure, but it IS PART OF THE EVALUATION.

If it was the only concern with Rosen, it wouldn't be something to even think about. But it's not the only concern.

He is not as good as some of you think he is. Some of you are so used to mediocrity you don't know what a GREAT QB prospect looks like anymore. Rosen just isn't "great". He's decent, but not great.

So if you disagree with me, please point to your specific arguments about him, emphasis on SPECIFIC, on why he is great. Give me the goods he has. What are they? Because the only thing he has that is GREAT or at least VERY GOOD is technique. There isn't one other aspect of him or his game that I'm putting at the elite level. Not his arm, not his accuracy, not his mobility...so what is it? He is not bad in any of those areas (except mobility), but he is "passable" in all of them. Likewise, what you are going to get at the NFL level is a "passable" QB. You should want more at #2 overall.

I'd rather Josh Allen, even. At least I can tell you multiple things and attributes at which he is GREAT.

using the opinion of a small percentage off BBI'ers as if they represent all of BBI.

something people weren't aware of.

But the conversation of health where Rosen is concerned does not seem to be coming from an informed place. I see people parroting the same words over and over, and I've asked in multiple threads what his actual injury situation is (since I'm on the east coast and haven't watched him play), and nobody seems to have any more information than what's out there. That he missed half a season to shoulder surgery, and missed time due to a concussion.

That's not "injury prone". That's playing football for a living, especially when he's apparently played behind a lackluster O-line. I see nothing about that that tells me that he's any more of a risk than anyone else who puts on a Giants jersey.

In comment 13830319 81_Great_Dane said:

Quote:

but realistically, don't you have to assume every single guy in the draft has had a concussion or two or three?

Yes, but wouldn’t that also mean potentially more for Rosen?

In comment 13830350 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

something people weren't aware of. But the conversation of health where Rosen is concerned does not seem to be coming from an informed place. I see people parroting the same words over and over, and I've asked in multiple threads what his actual injury situation is (since I'm on the east coast and haven't watched him play), and nobody seems to have any more information than what's out there. That he missed half a season to shoulder surgery, and missed time due to a concussion. That's not "injury prone". That's playing football for a living, especially when he's apparently played behind a lackluster O-line. I see nothing about that that tells me that he's any more of a risk than anyone else who puts on a Giants jersey.

Ok. I never said injury prone. I said his multiple concussions and the length of them are 100% worrisome.

In comment 13830312 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

1. His concussion 2. Milton's obsession

It's weird. Milton will latch onto a solid draft prospect and for 4-5 months, hammer BBI with threads and posts talking up "his guy". He will trumpet the player's strengths and pooh-pooh what many consider valid concerns.

The word "obsession" is on the mark. It's as if Milton feels that by hammering BBI with "his guy", posters here will come to see things his way and he will tip the scales of the Giants draft board and have that guy get picked.

Last year it was Ramczyk.

OP, you're fighting a straw man here.

The vast majority of the concerns with Rosen have absolutely nothing to do with his college record.

In comment 13830355 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

In comment 13830350 Ten Ton Hammer said: Quote: something people weren't aware of. But the conversation of health where Rosen is concerned does not seem to be coming from an informed place. I see people parroting the same words over and over, and I've asked in multiple threads what his actual injury situation is (since I'm on the east coast and haven't watched him play), and nobody seems to have any more information than what's out there. That he missed half a season to shoulder surgery, and missed time due to a concussion. That's not "injury prone". That's playing football for a living, especially when he's apparently played behind a lackluster O-line. I see nothing about that that tells me that he's any more of a risk than anyone else who puts on a Giants jersey. Ok. I never said injury prone. I said his multiple concussions and the length of them are 100% worrisome.

I know you didn't, but I'm not and haven't been directing all my comments at you. That label comes up in nearly every Rosen thread.

trashed Rosen for his W-L record??

Out of the hundreds of Rosen threads that’s the one area that never really becomes a talking point —-because it shouldn’t.

Op i’d love for you to find some examples.

In comment 13830355 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

Ok. I never said injury prone. I said his multiple concussions and the length of them are 100% worrisome.

A little positive news came on BBI last month with regards to Rosen. A poster who is an orthopedic surgeon posted here that if a person has had multiple concussions and can go a year w/o another one, he will no longer be "concussion prone" and will now have the average of having a new concussion.

Whatever team gets Rosen hopefully will have him just learn in 2018.

In comment 13830288 JohnB said:

Quote:

do so because of his history of concussions. A few too many hits to the head and his career is over with. Otherwise, people have a lot of positive things to say about him.

This...at least for me. Too early to take damaged goods

In comment 13830359 mrvax said:

Quote:

In comment 13830312 robbieballs2003 said: Quote: 1. His concussion 2. Milton's obsession It's weird. Milton will latch onto a solid draft prospect and for 4-5 months, hammer BBI with threads and posts talking up "his guy". He will trumpet the player's strengths and pooh-pooh what many consider valid concerns. The word "obsession" is on the mark. It's as if Milton feels that by hammering BBI with "his guy", posters here will come to see things his way and he will tip the scales of the Giants draft board and have that guy get picked. Last year it was Ramczyk.

Milton is a great poster. I just like busting his balls.

In comment 13830359 mrvax said:

Quote:

In comment 13830312 robbieballs2003 said: Quote: 1. His concussion 2. Milton's obsession It's weird. Milton will latch onto a solid draft prospect and for 4-5 months, hammer BBI with threads and posts talking up "his guy". He will trumpet the player's strengths and pooh-pooh what many consider valid concerns. The word "obsession" is on the mark. It's as if Milton feels that by hammering BBI with "his guy", posters here will come to see things his way and he will tip the scales of the Giants draft board and have that guy get picked. Last year it was Ramczyk.

I thought it was Cam Robinson.

In comment 13830373 mrvax said:

Quote:

In comment 13830355 robbieballs2003 said: Quote: Ok. I never said injury prone. I said his multiple concussions and the length of them are 100% worrisome. A little positive news came on BBI last month with regards to Rosen. A poster who is an orthopedic surgeon posted here that if a person has had multiple concussions and can go a year w/o another one, he will no longer be "concussion prone" and will now have the average of having a new concussion. Whatever team gets Rosen hopefully will have him just learn in 2018.

More and more evidence comes out often today with all the attention paid to CTE. If that is true and we can have him sit for at least a year then that would be ideal.

In comment 13830359 mrvax said:

Quote:

The word "obsession" is on the mark. It's as if Milton feels that by hammering BBI with "his guy", posters here will come to see things his way and he will tip the scales of the Giants draft board and have that guy get picked. Last year it was Ramczyk.

Last year it was Cam Robinson. And it's not that I feel I'm gonna change minds by hammering people with "my guy" and I certainly don't think I'll have any influence on the Giants draft board, it's just me participating in a thread.
My Guy - ( New Window )

In comment 13830385 Milton said:

Quote:

Last year it was Cam Robinson. And it's not that I feel I'm gonna change minds by hammering people with "my guy" and I certainly don't think I'll have any influence on the Giants draft board, it's just me participating in a thread. My Guy - ( New Window )

I have always enjoyed your posts, Milton. Robbie's too.

In comment 13830350 Ten Ton Hammer said:

Quote:

I've asked in multiple threads what his actual injury situation is (since I'm on the east coast and haven't watched him play), and nobody seems to have any more information than what's out there. That he missed half a season to shoulder surgery, and missed time due to a concussion.

He injured his shoulder playing tennis as a 12-year old and it caused him to give up the game, because he didn't love it enough to have the surgery. I don't know if there's any connection between the two, but he had another shoulder injury his sophomore year at UCLA and this time he had the surgery.

The two concussions didn't appear serious, but the fact that they occurred within four weeks of each other meant they didn't want to risk a third concussion within such a short period of time and that's why he was kept out of his bowl game. It wasn't because he was still feeling symptoms.

And this is why the concussions don't concern me. He is going to sit behind Eli for a year or two, so the concussions will be far enough in his rearview mirror to be a non-factor going forward. He is not going to cut his career short because of concussions (as some seem to fear even to the point of being convinced that will happen). This isn't a Chris Borland situation we are talking about with him.

It's the guys who are crashing into each other on just about every play who are taking on the greatest risk in terms of concussions. OL, DL, MLB, FB, who knows how many minor concussions these guys are having per game? It doesn't show up on film, but it adds up.

In comment 13830288 JohnB said:

Quote:

do so because of his history of concussions. A few too many hits to the head and his career is over with. Otherwise, people have a lot of positive things to say about him.

+1 I don't think is win-loss record is held against as much as his potential physical durability.

He is now #2 on my wishlist after Darnold. If it weren't for the concussions he would be #1.

In comment 13830371 bLiTz 2k said:

Quote:

trashed Rosen for his W-L record?? Out of the hundreds of Rosen threads that’s the one area that never really becomes a talking point —-because it shouldn’t. Op i’d love for you to find some examples.

Dear Blitz

First of all thanks for responding in a respectful manner , so many on bbi just attempt to trash other people , and u didn't do that , so that's refreshing.

I don't have an exact quote , but more than a few times people on this board quote Parcells , and say all that mattered to him was a qb's win loss record in college.

And there is this misnomer going around , that Parcells philosophy is all that matters , and I was showing how bogus that philosophy is when evaluating a college qb.

Matt Leinart proves my point. I could only imagine what I would find out if I did other win loss records on other big name college qb's coming out.

has a somewhat thin build that reminds me of Tony Eason. Even Sy said he had the body of a high school sophomore. Maybe he can add weight in an NFL weight training program, but he should be better developed after being at UCLA. Eli admittedly had a similar build, but he might be an exception. The quality of OL play in the NFL has also declined because more colleges use spread offenses. That increases the number of hits on QBs. As I've said, I'm not really enamored with Darnold, Rosen, or Allen at #2.

no idea why his 30 year old, out dated mantra is touted as gospel. The NFL is so radically different now and QB's are seeing success earlier than ever before. And with the rookie pay scale, the risk with QB's is far less than it once was.

I'm not sure I understand it. I think a QB being able to win is a meaningful part of the process, just like evaluating tape or evaluating other statistics. There isn't likely a strong correlation between a QB winning a lot of games and being a successful QB, but there seems to be a relatively strong correlation of QBs who have winning percentages below 60% and them NOT being successful QBs in the NFL.

Aside from pure numbers mumbo jumbo, I think there is a valid question around why UCLA didn't win more as the team was talented and Rosen should have brought that team to another level. He didn't.

In comment 13830416 AdamBrag said:

Quote:

I'm not sure I understand it. I think a QB being able to win is a meaningful part of the process, just like evaluating tape or evaluating other statistics. There isn't likely a strong correlation between a QB winning a lot of games and being a successful QB, but there seems to be a relatively strong correlation of QBs who have winning percentages below 60% and them NOT being successful QBs in the NFL. Aside from pure numbers mumbo jumbo, I think there is a valid question around why UCLA didn't win more as the team was talented and Rosen should have brought that team to another level. He didn't.

I just researched Jamarcus Russell , former #1 pick of the Raiders.

At LSU his win/loss record was 21-4 , way better than Rosen's , and was a total complete bust in the NFL.

Josh Rosen has only won 17 games in 3 years as a starter at UCLA. A big reason is because in his second year he missed a whole slew of games because of injury.

I guarantee Josh Rosen will have a very successful career compared to Jamarcus Russell , and will prove what a sham that win loss record Parcells came up with is a joke...

You?

In comment 13830426 sxdxca said:

Quote:

In comment 13830416 AdamBrag said: Quote: I'm not sure I understand it. I think a QB being able to win is a meaningful part of the process, just like evaluating tape or evaluating other statistics. There isn't likely a strong correlation between a QB winning a lot of games and being a successful QB, but there seems to be a relatively strong correlation of QBs who have winning percentages below 60% and them NOT being successful QBs in the NFL. Aside from pure numbers mumbo jumbo, I think there is a valid question around why UCLA didn't win more as the team was talented and Rosen should have brought that team to another level. He didn't. I just researched Jamarcus Russell , former #1 pick of the Raiders. At LSU his win/loss record was 21-4 , way better than Rosen's , and was a total complete bust in the NFL. Josh Rosen has only won 17 games in 3 years as a starter at UCLA. A big reason is because in his second year he missed a whole slew of games because of injury. I guarantee Josh Rosen will have a very successful career compared to Jamarcus Russell , and will prove what a sham that win loss record Parcells came up with is a joke...

Jay Cutler had a losing record at Vandy with a very weak supporting cast. From a physical and talent standpoint they are similar players. Now Cutler's biggest flaw is his attitude and work ethic. I wasn't implying that I believe Rosen will be the next Cutler I was just posting a counter argument.

You are thinking about putting a kid who thinks he is a social justice pioneer and who feels the need to be outspoken on issues of the day into the NY media market.

He will get eaten up alive.

In comment 13830472 ThatLimerickGuy said:

Quote:

You are thinking about putting a kid who thinks he is a social justice pioneer and who feels the need to be outspoken on issues of the day into the NY media market. He will get eaten up alive.

Yeah, cause that’s really the big concern. Your agenda reeks here.

In comment 13830426 sxdxca said:

Quote:

I guarantee Josh Rosen will have a very successful career compared to Jamarcus Russell , and will prove what a sham that win loss record Parcells came up with is a joke...

Now hold on there partner. I believe the Parcells quote contained about 5 different things he looked for in a QB. Wins/losses was just 1 of them. And since the quote is likely 30+ years old, I wouldn't put too much stock in it. It could have been a rule of thumb when Bill made his comments.

In comment 13830486 mrvax said:

Quote:

In comment 13830426 sxdxca said: Quote: I guarantee Josh Rosen will have a very successful career compared to Jamarcus Russell , and will prove what a sham that win loss record Parcells came up with is a joke... Now hold on there partner. I believe the Parcells quote contained about 5 different things he looked for in a QB. Wins/losses was just 1 of them. And since the quote is likely 30+ years old, I wouldn't put too much stock in it. It could have been a rule of thumb when Bill made his comments.

These are Parcells guidelines for drafting a qb

#1 He must be a senior

#2 He must be a graduate

#3 He must be a 3 year starter

#4 He must have at least 23 wins

Under normal circumstances these are nice guidelines , but Matt leinart 37 wins 2 losses , Jamarcus Russel 21 wins 4 losses , kind of shows its not a perfect formula.

In comment 13830505 sxdxca said:

Quote:

In comment 13830486 mrvax said: Quote: In comment 13830426 sxdxca said: Quote: I guarantee Josh Rosen will have a very successful career compared to Jamarcus Russell , and will prove what a sham that win loss record Parcells came up with is a joke... Now hold on there partner. I believe the Parcells quote contained about 5 different things he looked for in a QB. Wins/losses was just 1 of them. And since the quote is likely 30+ years old, I wouldn't put too much stock in it. It could have been a rule of thumb when Bill made his comments. These are Parcells guidelines for drafting a qb #1 He must be a senior #2 He must be a graduate #3 He must be a 3 year starter #4 He must have at least 23 wins Under normal circumstances these are nice guidelines , but Matt leinart 37 wins 2 losses , Jamarcus Russel 21 wins 4 losses , kind of shows its not a perfect formula.

Parcells wouldn't have drafted Russell under his guidelines as Russell was Junior when he declared so he obviously didn't graduate.

In comment 13830505 sxdxca said:

Quote:

In comment 13830486 mrvax said: Quote: In comment 13830426 sxdxca said: Quote: I guarantee Josh Rosen will have a very successful career compared to Jamarcus Russell , and will prove what a sham that win loss record Parcells came up with is a joke... Now hold on there partner. I believe the Parcells quote contained about 5 different things he looked for in a QB. Wins/losses was just 1 of them. And since the quote is likely 30+ years old, I wouldn't put too much stock in it. It could have been a rule of thumb when Bill made his comments. These are Parcells guidelines for drafting a qb #1 He must be a senior #2 He must be a graduate #3 He must be a 3 year starter #4 He must have at least 23 wins Under normal circumstances these are nice guidelines , but Matt leinart 37 wins 2 losses , Jamarcus Russel 21 wins 4 losses , kind of shows its not a perfect formula.

Tom Brady was a 2 year starter. There are plenty of successful QBs that don't check all the boxes.