Stanzi Wonderlic

Wow...just...wow. That's pretty crazy to see an apparent unbiased source so high up on Stanzi...
 
R.C. Fisher is the same author from the other Stanzi thread. He is simply trying to justify his formula. If he's right he makes millions, if he's wrong he fades into obscurity. He truly has nothing to lose by picking a fringe QB that could potentially justify his findings. I'd expect at least two more articles from this guy before the draft on Stanzi.
 
Realistically Stanzi isn't going to get drafted until late 4th to 7th round. This guy knows it. He's hoping that Stanzi can prove the know-it-alls wrong and make something of himself in the NFL. If that ever happens you will see him fly out of his dark cavern shouting to the entire world that his statistical formula proved it years ago and everyone should have listened to him.
 
Most Hawk fans I know haven't been giving Stanzi a chance in the NFL. I like that his tangibles are gaining some momentum by some of these analysts. I thought for awhile now he will be a solid backup for somebody and who knows what could happen after that. Will be fun to watch. Too many Hawk fans expect perfection and are quick to write someone off who doesn't give them the results they wish for, which is unfortunate (and very Husker-like).
 
We must have seen that at the same time...RC sent me an email just now to let me know of his article and I was writing up the ditty I posted in this forum.

It's good news for the Ricker ;)
 
hawkeye12345 said:
He's hoping that Stanzi can prove the know-it-alls wrong and make something of himself in the NFL. If that ever happens you will see him fly out of his dark cavern shouting to the entire world that his statistical formula proved it years ago and everyone should have listened to him.
Click to expand...

And if that happens, this guy is gonna get PAID by some NFL team who will want to buy his formula.
 
JonDMiller said:
We must have seen that at the same time...RC sent me an email just now to let me know of his article and I was writing up the ditty I posted in this forum.

It's good news for the Ricker ;)
Click to expand...

Yup, sorry Jon. You can either merge or delete this thread, no biggie.
 
JonDMiller said:
And if that happens, this guy is gonna get PAID by some NFL team who will want to buy his formula.
Click to expand...

Exactly. He has nothing to lose. It's not like Ricky is a bad QB, he's not. If Ricky isn't successful in the NFL (he won't be) then RC can just chalk Stanzi up to the statistical anomaly. No harm, no foul.
 
hawkeye12345 said:
Exactly. He has nothing to lose. It's not like Ricky is a bad QB, he's not. If Ricky isn't successful in the NFL (he won't be) then RC can just chalk Stanzi up to the statistical anomaly. No harm, no foul.
Click to expand...

Its like deja vu all over again.

Again, I don't think you read the article(s). This guy didn't pick Stanzi and then try to find the stats to back it up, he used the stats to find the guy that just so happened to be Stanzi. (which was a surprise to him apparantly)
 
theboat said:
Its like deja vu all over again.

Again, I don't think you read the article(s). This guy didn't pick Stanzi and then try to find the stats to back it up, he used the stats to find the guy that just so happened to be Stanzi. (which was a surprise to him apparantly)
Click to expand...

Hmm. Not sure why, but I hadn't thought of it that way. I like that way of thinking. ;)
 
theboat said:
Its like deja vu all over again.

Again, I don't think you read the article(s). This guy didn't pick Stanzi and then try to find the stats to back it up, he used the stats to find the guy that just so happened to be Stanzi. (which was a surprise to him apparantly)
Click to expand...

boat, you are smarter than that.

First of all, would the initial article be worth anything if the stats showed one of the top 4 QBs? Of course not. ALL of the analysts are predicting those guys to be high draft picks. They are doing it based upon the actions on the field too. Those 4 QBs pass the eye test. Stanzi doesn't so he is a perfect poster child for this guy to get paid - IF Stanzi proves him to be right.

No red flags for Stanzi? Maybe according to this guys stats but taking sacks in the red zone on 3rd down and moving the team out of FG position would be a red flag. Throwing pick 6s would be a red flag.
 
hawkeye12345 said:
boat, you are smarter than that.

First of all, would the initial article be worth anything if the stats showed one of the top 4 QBs? Of course not. ALL of the analysts are predicting those guys to be high draft picks. They are doing it based upon the actions on the field too. Those 4 QBs pass the eye test. Stanzi doesn't so he is a perfect poster child for this guy to get paid - IF Stanzi proves him to be right.

No red flags for Stanzi? Maybe according to this guys stats but taking sacks in the red zone on 3rd down and moving the team out of FG position would be a red flag. Throwing pick 6s would be a red flag.
Click to expand...

You are doing the exact same thing as this guy. If Ricky is taken in the late 5th or 6th round, you are going to come around these parts pounding your chest about how right you were. Whether or not Ricky turns into an average to good NFL QB will be determined in how he progresses in the next 2-3 years, not by what he did or didn't do the last 2-3 years.
 
hawkeye12345 said:
boat, you are smarter than that.

First of all, would the initial article be worth anything if the stats showed one of the top 4 QBs? Of course not. ALL of the analysts are predicting those guys to be high draft picks. They are doing it based upon the actions on the field too. Those 4 QBs pass the eye test. Stanzi doesn't so he is a perfect poster child for this guy to get paid - IF Stanzi proves him to be right.

No red flags for Stanzi? Maybe according to this guys stats but taking sacks in the red zone on 3rd down and moving the team out of FG position would be a red flag. Throwing pick 6s would be a red flag.
Click to expand...

I would say that none of the 4 QBs pass the eye test. There is anything but a sure thing at QB in this draft. If Stanzi threw the ball 45 times a game he would have the same stats as a guy like Gabbert (also stated in the article).

And if what you say is correct, then why would he throw out Andrew Luck as well, since he is the most "sure" thing at QB in the last 5 years?

You seem determined to hope for Stanzi's failure and I don't get it.
 
theboat said:
I would say that none of the 4 QBs pass the eye test. There is anything but a sure thing at QB in this draft. If Stanzi threw the ball 45 times a game he would have the same stats as a guy like Gabbert (also stated in the article).

And if what you say is correct, then why would he throw out Andrew Luck as well, since he is the most "sure" thing at QB in the last 5 years?

You seem determined to hope for Stanzi's failure and I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Rooting for RS to fail. A$$ IMO.
 
RC also has a formula that has proven hawkeye12345 is a d-bag.

Also, Tom Brady has never taken a sack that moved his team out of field goal range. its a FACT.
 
ICHawk24 said:
RC also has a formula that has proven hawkeye12345 is a d-bag.

Also, Tom Brady has never taken a sack that moved his team out of field goal range. its a FACT.
Click to expand...

Ricky also studied, learned, and grew from his pick 6 season. An invalid red flag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top