I long thought that Manziel had no chance at all in the pros...but softened up a bit on that when so many (scouts, fans) seemed to think he had a legit shot to be anywhere from at least a decent pro to a real stud.

Obviously, last week he found out that the garbage ball that he won with in college is a different thing vs. the pros.

Remember that play he made in the bowl on New Year's Eve last year where he ran up the back of one of his own O-linemen and then fell off to make a big play? That thing was shown on SportsCenter a million times on an adjacent TV when the g.f. and I were out to dinner last NY EVE. That was a classic, classic example of a play that wouldn't work in the pros--they are so much quicker and bigger that you get killed if you try that garbage in the pros.

Maybe Manziel will work out. But I'm dubious--too small and doesn't have the pro qb skill set (big arm, stand in pocket take hits, read thru progressions etc).

The point of all this? I think that a lot of you misoverestimate the talent which we put on the field--relative to pro ability and relative to college competition. And misoverestimate by a lot.

My son, a devoted Browns fan, agrees with this assessment. I'm personally a little more hopeful that Johnny Football will work out after he gets used to the difference between the college and pro game, but my son is very down on him. But, as Monroe knows, I tend to be an optimist. Let me add that this does't mean that I'm always wrong. ;-)

I see him as another Brady Quinn or Tim Tebow. He has talent but not enough to make it in the NFL. His parents taught him the lesson that if you don't like the rules, make threats and they'll change the rules for you. That doesn't work in the NFL. I'll be glad when he's moved on so I can at least watch a Browns' game without barfing a half dozen times when they show him on the sideline or mention his name. I work with a die-hard Browns' fan from Cleveland who feels the same way. Of course, the Browns always seem to make the same poor QB choices, no matter who's running the team. They've had something like 20 starting QBs since being resurrected in Cleveland.

In fairness to Johnny, the Browns offense has fallen apart since Mack went out at center. I am a Browns fans and not a Johnny fan but the offense fell apart long before he took over at QB. Gordon has been terrible, Mike Austin out, no blocking at all up the middle and everyone is stacking 8-9 guys at the line of scrimage. They lost two tight ends as well and have two rookie running backs.
Put him on a really good offensive team and he may be decent but he is not going to take anyone to the playoffs.

The badness lately by the Browns certainly does coincide with the loss of Mack at center.


Speaking if misunderoverestimating, how come on the hoops thread there is ready admission that we are not a good team now (see first page of the thread on today's game vs. Geo Washington) and ready recognition that we lack quality at certain positions (guard in basketball...mentioned in many threads)--but the hardest core of diehards here on football will not even come anywhere near condsidering that we are football mediocre and our football talent is less than stellar?

Funny thing is, for the last 2.5 years, football's been pretty much not as good as hoops--so the ability to recognize the apparent bad of the truth should be easier for football.

bcat2, situation--you owe me answers here.

Monroe gets my bingo for the day. I was thinking the same thing. Interesting that if anyone (like Monroe and me)says something negative about FB they get drilled. Yet, you go over to BB and the same guys that drill us on FB for being negative say we have no playmakers in BB?!?

I got blasted many times for saying we were bad. Having to see before every game guys predicting victories and then after every game saying how great the other team was when they supposedly sucked one day prior. The one I really like is the predicted power rankings always showing Ohio much higher than they were and Ball St being way up there above N. I'llinois even at the end of the season. I blasted the stupid system saying way before the last 3 weeks of the season that N. ll was way better than Ball St and guess who was right about a month ago (me). Apparently several on here know much more than Sagarin and the pro's in Las Vegas.

I'm the same way too; I love football and it's my favorite sport. But I think more than anything Ohio football's an afterthought to most people at Ohio. I think those of us on this board that are football geeks (that's me) are a very small minority of alumni. I know when an Ohio alumnus advised me on the plane ride to Mobile for the then GMAC Bowl that there was a messageboard for those interested in Ohio athletics my jaw hit the floor as athletics was the LAST thing people cared about when I was at Ohio.

True 'dat! Unfortunate.

http://www.bbstate.com/info/teams-hoopsbudget&c=MAC

Well, we presently spend 50% more on hoops than the next closest MAC program, and have for years, plus have had the best venue since the late '60's.

I can honestly say without hesitation that due to this long term emphasis on putting hoops first, I have much higher expectations for our hoops program than I do for football.

I don't give FB a pass, but just based on our institutional priorities for, oh, let's say sixty years, hoops should be held to a higher standard, no?

Not so, it means packaged, right?