Famous Quotes: Stafford and Harrington
by theclipboard on Sep 21, 2009 1:08 PM EDT
29 comments
After yet another loss I was sitting quietly on my couch pondering the recent quote by brett favre on our new up and coming superstar quarterback. In case you missed it, Brett had this to say about Stafford ""I mean, he's got all the tools, there's no doubt about it. But there's only one way to get better, and that's play. They drafted him for a lot of reasons, and from what I can tell, I think he'll have a bright future."
That got me thinking, I wonder what the critics had to say about good ole Joey when he came out...I'm not saying Matt's the next Joey, the point I'm making is there always exist a tremendous amount of hype when it comes to high round QBs. The only thing that has ever been able to truely filter the hype is their sunday performances.
“When it’s crunch time, it doesn’t matter what he’s done to that point, Joey will put the ball where it can be caught or make the audible or get a first down on a scramble to keep the drive alive.”
—Oregon coach Mike Belotti
“His work ethic is unmatched by anyone. Off the field, he’s just relaxed.”
—Former Oregon teammate Justin Peele
“He’s just a total team player. As long as I’ve been coaching him, Joey was never interested in personal awards.”
—Joey’s offensive coordinator at Oregon Jeff Tedford
“Joey Harrington is a special football player.”
—Senior Bowl President Steve Hale
“He’s going to be the quarterback for the ages here. The kid is a playmaker and a natural-born leader. I love the way he handles himself. When he tells you something, you believe in him, because when you look in his eyes, you see a guy with a ton of confidence and a lot of determination.”
—NFL veteran Todd Lyght
“He really is an accurate passer, especially for how young he is. He makes good quick decisions. He pulls the trigger, and he pulls it fast.”
—Former Lions coach Marty Mornhinweg
“Joey does a lot of important things naturally, and he’s a leader. He’s coming along quickly.”
—Mornhinweg
“Trust me, this guy is going to be a damn good quarterback. He reminds me a little of Brett Favre. He doesn’t have to set his feet when he slings it to get the ball where it needs to go.”
—Cowboys safety Darren Woodson
“I think he’s going to be a great quarterback.”
—Saints head coach Jim Haslett
“I’ve been around young quarterbacks who get so freaked out that you can see the whites of their eyes, but not this guy. He’s so relentlessly positive and has such a passion for the game that it’s a pleasure to block for him.”
—Lions teammate Tony Semple
“Joey’s a special player. He wants to perfect everything he does.”
—NFL veteran Eric Davis
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pride of Detroit's main writer, Sean, or the site in general. FanPosts are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable fans.
0 recs |
29 comments
Email
Print
Comments
So in other words......
……you think Stafford is going to be the next Harrington?……That is laughable…….Staffs arm is much straonger then Harringtons ever was……he has field vison…..yes hes thrown picks but hes taking chances and that I like……GO STAFF GO LIONS!!!
by BennieBladesFan on Sep 21, 2009 1:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
ok stop
He has thrown 5 Ints in 2 games and not a single one was him taking a risk, Thats why i have problems with Stafford right now he isn’t throwing up jump balls to Calvin Johnson he is trying to force things, that’s why i don’t like Stafford right now! Oh and for all of you people who said Stafford beat Culpepper out in Training Camp because he took risks and went long, were the heck are you now? Stafford goes out and every play looks for Calvin Johnson 10 yards out,until someone says “Hey Matt can i get a few touchs?” so then he looks to them. Look this Offense is a joke, we have HUGE Potential on this team and it seems like plays are being called to limit ourselves i mean come on it is horrible to watch this Offense im sorry. Cut Stafford loose, you Drafted the kid for his decision making and his Arm Strength so send the NFL’s Best WR out long and throw the Ball down field, stop with these little short plays to one guy send out 3 WRs and a TE and let him make the choices, cause frankly i believe he is told to much to throw to Calvin by the Coaching Staff and im sick of it because if they don’t understand that a 2 man Offense can’t beat people then they should be fired
by JMW62689 on Sep 21, 2009 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh and another thing
don’t give me this crap about how he is a Rookie and is going to make mistakes, if he is going to make mistakes why is he getting paid 70 Million Dollars? If you get paid that much you Produce that much, that my friends is the name of the game
by JMW62689 on Sep 21, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't know the game very well, then do you....
by DrewsLions on Sep 22, 2009 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He should have said.....
If you get paid that much, you SHOULD produce that much…..but that is a little unrealistic I guess. I think he should be treated just like a veteran though….if there is a guy waiting for his chance and you are stinking up the place, then you make way for that person. I definitely do not think that zero accountability is a good thing….there is no checks and balances. If a player is not motivated to keep their job, which is supposed to be earned, and they do not have to worry about any repercussions for bad performance, then they will probably continue to do what they have been doing because they think it is fine.
by KDawg on Sep 22, 2009 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Drew Stanton's still waiting for his chance......
Culpepper came off the couch and got his chance last year. Would you support finally giving Drew his chance once he’s back?
What? He can’t block a dead gopher? Humph, details.
by GRLion on Sep 22, 2009 12:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would also support doing anything but being complacent
and just sticking with one guy simply because he was the #1 pick and because he is the future of the team (key word: future)…..they can’t possibly want to set the NFL record for most consecutive losses…..can they? I honestly wish this kid would step it up and make me EAT MY WORDS! But GD it….he has not done it thus far. Will he do it soon. or will he suck all year as he “gets used to the NFL”? Can the Lions really afford to keep him at QB all year, regardless of any potential consequences (like setting the consecutive losses record, going 0-16 again, or maybe even losing key players to free agency that we would like to keep around)? I say give him a chance to prove that he deserves to be the starter in week 3. If he is still forcing passes and turning the ball over (even against the Redskins), then I say give DC a shot in week 4 (LOL….I know it won’t happen, but seriously why shouldn’t it?).
If Culpepper doesn’t get it done, what would we have to lose by giving Stanton a chance if he is back (again….not going to happen, but why not?)? If Stanton isn’t back, and DC doesn’t get it done in week 4 (all hypothetically), then I say let the veteran play until the bye week. If the Lions are 0-6 at the bye (with DC getting 3 games (at Bears, Pitt at home, and at Lambeau) to Stafford’s 3 (At NO, MIN at home, and Washington at home)) then by all means let the kid play out the rest of the season (unless we want to give Stanton a few games on the QB carousel). I often wonder “What would Wayne Fontes do?” I think he would keep turning the merry-go-round until one of his QBs showed something….then he would stick with that one until they failed.
We need a win….and I am hoping that the rook can get it done next week. I really am. I want him to succeed as much as anyone else does. However, I (unlike some) will not be content with letting him ruin every chance we have to win a game. If he can’t get it done against a struggling Redskin team………
………
…………..
Then he will STILL be the starter in week 4, 5, and 6!! LOL!
by KDawg on Sep 22, 2009 1:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Might not be the end of the world
if we went your route. Depending on how things go, we may have painted ourselves into a corner where we have to do that, at least for a few weeks. My biggest disappointment last year is when Stanton didn’t get his shot. I supported giving Orlovsky half a dozen starts last year……not because I thought he would succeed, but because I knew he would fail and wanted that proven on the field so we could move on. Unfortunately, instead of giving Stanton his chance, last year’s regime brought in Culpepper off the couch and gave him that chance instead. Now, we are ironically in a situation where Culpepper is on the bench waiting for his chance….another chance. I supported starting Pepp in game 1 this year….not because I thought he played the best in preseason (I thought he was 3rd in a close 3-way race)…..but because, like Orlovsky, if Culpepper is going to fail, best to find it out at the start, cut/trade him, and move on. End the QB controversy. Now things are, to say the least, messy……and potentially messier if we bench Stafford for Pepp at this point. But this is where we are.
We’ve got some choices. Keep starting Stafford, keep Culpepper on bench. As it stands, we have a QB controversy. And Pepp seems aloof from Staff on the sidelines, yet seems to be actively recruiting friends in the lockerroom. This could be divisive.
Start Stafford, dump Culpepper. Could happen……maybe soon, maybe later. There will be some what-if’s…..but mitigated by the fact that there IS a track record on Culpepper.
Give Culpepper a few starts. Give him another chance to prove he’s worth keeping around as a starter…….if he doesn’t impress, dump him with no regrets. Maybe even give Stanton a chance too (and I think Stanton would be happy now as a quality backup, given his style/injury history, etc…..so we could still keep Drew regardless). The key is,…..if Culpepper doesn’t do well, cut the cord immmediately…….trade/waive him, don’t put him back on the bench. Culpepper’s next chance here should be his last chance, or we’ll have a divided team.
I’m not against giving Culpepper another chance, but that ship may have sailed. If we don’t trade/cut Culpepper soon, we may be forced to do give him another chance anyway……or maybe not. I don’t know. This would be a good time for another convenient injury……Stafford out a couple weeks with something minor, Culpepper starts, fails, gets traded/cut, Stanton comes back in time for a little garbage time late in games. Then Culpepper’s gone, he had his chances, no regrets. Drew shows what he can do. Stafford’s back in as the starter the rest of the year. Works for me.
What? He can’t block a dead gopher? Humph, details.
by GRLion on Sep 22, 2009 2:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We have a QB controversy?
Since when?
by Nate D. on Sep 23, 2009 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like you man, but you're crazy!
Drew Stanton?? Really??
You must have a dart in your neck. The guy is still rehabbing. If he isn’t, then he must have gotten hurt again.
I mean, he looked good in the pre-season but c’mon.
Besides, you don’t change QB’s after 2 games. He hasn’t been great, but he is wet behind the ears. I am the last person to jump on the Stafford wagon, but hey he is the QB of the future and it has only been two games.
by The Maestro on Sep 22, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said.....
Let him play again in week 3. If he blows the game when we could actually win it (again) then I say make him sit for a minute or two. Seriously, why not? Same token on the Stanton idea….why not actually SEE if the guy can get it done for real? Are we going to the playoffs this year? Next year? The year after that? I seriously doubt it. So like GRLion said, why not see these guys on the field, in an actual regular season game with the starters, and find out whether or not they pass or fail?
Stafford is going to be around for years to come…..we all know that. It would not hurt him to sit for a few weeks, and maybe it would help bring things into perspective for him. I think it is absolute bullshi* to allow him to just keep playing and making stupid mistakes when we have other options (unless of course the FO’s plan is to play for the #1 pick again next year). Indianapolis did not have another option behind Peyton. Dallas had Aikman and Steve Walsh….if you want to call Walsh another option. I could see the kid playing every single game if we had no other option, but I think we do and I think we should utilize it if need be.
Maybe Stafford will come out and throw for over 300 yards in a mistake free game this weekend, and the Lions will destroy the Redskins. If that happens, then we will know that he is finally starting to get it. If he continues to force throws and give the ball away at critical moments of the game, then I think it is retarded if there are no consequences for his continued failures. How long are we going to keep saying “Well, it has only been X number of games….”? Is 16 games enough time to evaluate ANY player? Last I knew, it took more like 2-3 years to be able to say a guy was a success or a failure.
by KDawg on Sep 22, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry
but it sounds like every quote I’ve ever read about any 1st round QB for any team. It’s always positive until they get on the field. Stafford may end up like Harrington. He might not. What people say about him now isn’t an indicator.
by James L on Sep 21, 2009 2:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
no harrington
but i do remember being very excited when harrington got the start and ate up all the good things the critics had to say about him. From what i’ve seen of stafford, he is in a whole other league than joey ever was and can’t wait till he has a game where everything thing seems to click.
by theclipboard on Sep 21, 2009 2:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow...
This was a really constructive post!
We get it. Everyone was all about Harrington when he was drafted. He was a good college player. What are the Detroit players and coaches supposed to say… “I just met Joey and I think the guy’s a major jerk-off. Then I saw him play… man! The guy is just a frail, indecisive schmuck. He’s going to tank and be out of the league in a month.”
Yawn…
by DrewsLions on Sep 21, 2009 5:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And you can list similar quotes about.....
Both Mannings and Troy Aikman, all of whom had disasterous rookie years. Peyton threw 26 TDs and 28 picks his rookie year and the Colts posted a 3-13 record. Did you watch the game last night? Seems he turned out OK. So has Eli.
Stafford will be fine, he needs some help around him. He will get better every week that he plays. He’s still adjusting to the speed of the NFL right now and he has to go through this process. It won’t be fun but it will pay off huge dividends later.
by MusicCityDawg on Sep 22, 2009 12:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And again.....
The Colts and Cowboys had no other (even potentially) viable options.
by KDawg on Sep 22, 2009 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You only assume...
Culpepper is a viable option. Right?
by DrewsLions on Sep 22, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok so you start DC and win how many games....
2 maybe 3, lets say its even 4. Great for a short term gain. Meanwhile you are putting the future of the franchise on hold and delaying the inevitable.
Put it this way, would you take another 0-16 season this year for the chance at a winning record two years down the road with with your QB of the future? Or would you rather go 4-12 this year, 8-8 the next, BUT start over the year after with Stafford who hasn’t taken any meaningful snaps in a game?
You have to think about the overall future of the franchise more than “when is this terrible losing streak going to end”?
Personally, I’d look to trade Culpepper for some draft picks and start loading up the D and a couple of fresh horses for the OL next year.
by MusicCityDawg on Sep 23, 2009 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok
It always seems like I have to keep repeating myself because someone always drags up an old argument that I have already rebuked. Your argument assumes that Stafford sitting for a few weeks would greatly hinder his development as an NFL QB. I completely disagree. Nobody knows what we COULD do if Daunte Culpepper was starting. We might be 2-0 right now….nobody knows! The argument that Stafford has to play in order to properly develop is also a weak argument. There are VERY FEW starting QBs in this league right now who started every single game as a rookie! As a matter of fact, I think that number is actually 3 (Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, and Joe Flacco…..Roethlisberger started 14, McNabb started 6, Collins started 13, and Eli Manning started 7). Only one of those 3 has even been to the Super Bowl, and I would bet that the other 2 take a much longer amount of time to get there, if they ever do.
We could go over every single starting QB in the league right now, remove the ones who have NOT been to the Super Bowl (whether or not they won or lost), and we would come up with a very small list. Of that list, only 1 QB started every game his rookie year! Peyton Manning! Of the current starting NFL QBs, the following have been to the Super Bowl:
1) Peyton Manning
2) Tom Brady
3) Donovan McNabb
4) Aaron Rodgers (as a backup)
5) Kerry Collins
6) Brett Favre
7) Eli Manning
8) Kurt Warner
9) Ben Roethlisberger
None of those guys, except Peyton Manning, played every single game of their rookie years. Tom Brady did not start a single game his rookie year, and went to the pro bowl the very first year he was the starter in NE. McNabb starter 6 games (played in 12) as a rookie (which means he sat for 4 weeks and played sparingly in all but 6 games). Aaron Rodgers sat for 3 years (playing in a few games here and there) before he got a single start. Kerry Collins started 13 games as a rookie for the expansion Carolina Panthers in 1995 (he sat for 3 weeks, injured or whatever, for an expansion team that went to the NFC championship game the very next season!). Brett Favre did not start a single game in Atlanta in 1991, but went to the pro bowl the very next season as the starter in Green Bay. Eli Manning started in 7 games as a rookie behind Kurt Warner for the Giants in 2004. They have been in the playoffs for the last 4 years with him as their starter, winning the Super Bowl in 2007. Kurt Warner did not start a single game in his first NFL season in 1998, but was first team all pro in 1999 when the Rams won the Super Bowl with him as their starter! And last, but not least, Ben Roethlisberger started in 14 games as a rookie (sitting out for 2 weeks). He started in 12 games in 2005 (after the motorcycle crash I think) and the Steelers won the Super Bowl with him as their starter.
The bottom line here, and the underlying point of all of this, is that a rookie QB DOES NOT have to start every single game (if any) of their rookie season in order to properly develop into a viable NFL starter and be successful in the league. There is no argument that can possibly say otherwise, as Peyton Manning is the only example of an exception to the rule. Stafford is not anywhere near as polished as Peyton Manning was as a rookie, and look how poorly Manning played in his rookie year (only to be awesome shortly thereafter, much like many of the other QBs who did not start every game in their rookie seasons). Was it really the fact that Peyton Manning started all 16 games as a rookie that made him so good in the following season, or was it simply a matter of timing for the Colts and the fact that Peyton already had it when he was drafted?? I think the latter is most definitely the case.
by KDawg on Sep 23, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
At the extreme risk...
…of going someplace I don’t want to go. I’m not willing to conced that Joey was as aweful as his performances indicated. Marty was a bad head coach, the Lions were a mediocre team in the process of being dismantled by Millen.
Joey certainly did little to inspire, but I know there was a brief period after Rogers was drafted that Joey actually didn’t look too terrible. The point being, maybe Joey should have done more with what he had, but lets not forget that what he had was provided by the worst General Manager in the history of sports.
If Joey had come to an organization that had an established team (and good, experienced, championship caliber management) that didn’t need him to do too much early, who truly knows where his career would have gone?
by Mushy on Sep 22, 2009 4:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Damn
I had a nice reply to your comment here Mushy…..but I saw Drew post a comment above and I clicked to reply before I had posted! Oops…..
Anyway the main idea of what I had said was this……I agree. I said something along these same lines here before and got ripped for it. I think Joey was thrust into an unfavorable situation in Detroit, too soon, and it ruined him in the long run (sounds familiar). I think he very well could have been a good QB under a different set of circumstances, much like David Carr. Anyone can sit here and say that they would have sucked no matter where they went, but if anyone truly believes that, then they just do not know football that well. I think it would be a stretch to say that Stafford was as polished as Harrington coming out of college. That said, I also think it would be a stretch to say that Harrington and Stafford are of the same mold. I think Stafford will be a far superior QB to Harrington in the long run, if he is not ruined in the same fashion.
by KDawg on Sep 22, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
He did okay in ATL too. Old Joey was just a season full of holding the ball too long, dropping it when hit, throwin it to the other team and not being able to read pre-snap defenses away from being one of the greats.
Joey was going to suck wherever he went because he was a mediocre college QB who got swooped up in the hype machine of that years draft. He’s Alex Smith from a better known college program.
Shiny’s no Joey. He’s got an arm. Time tells if their minds work differently
by MattyZ on Sep 23, 2009 2:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two different teams
Way different, Joeys first 2 years the line gave up 31 sacks total, 20 in`02 and 11 in `03. (With Barry of course). What`s the over under on this year line? I think 48 might be good.
by lionsfan64 on Sep 24, 2009 2:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
