rayzor

That's fine. It doesn't bother me that you disagree. I'm just stating that it's only opinions that are behind this durability issue. And those opinions might beat our to be right or wrong, but so far there has been nothing to show that there is justification for that opinion. Size is not an accurate predictor of durability... unless you are talking about oversized players, then we've got some evidence. There just isn't any for being too damn vs not being too small. And that's all I've been saying.

There is no evidence to support it. That's what I'm saying. That a QB is more likely to be injured because of his size...that has no evidence to back it up. Injury is unpredictable and can happen to anydamnbody regardless of size. Size matters for other reasons, but there is nothing bother than other opinions to back that claim up.

I think he's an awesome hire, the best we could have hoped for. I do think, and this is ok...that it's just an unsubstantiated opinion that Young will have durability issues because of his stature. He has an opinion about that. I have an opinion about that. They are different. We don't have to agree. I'm not going to lay my opinion to the side because coach says differently. I'll trust his judgement. Like I said, I think there are other reasons that are more valid and legit, imo, for choosing a taller QB that don't have to do with durability.

But was that because he was smaller than everyone else? Or because he was a QB throwing the ball?

But size didn't matter. You take hits and you're going to feel it, regardless of your size. There is no accurate predictor of injuries regardless of size aside from an actual injury history, and even then it's still a weak predictor.

Was that what they were saying to cover up for the fact that he was carrying 15 pounds of water weight and he'd start barfing all it it up if he started running?

Less durable based on opinion. There; s no evidence to support that Young has any durability issues. When has he been hurt? When has he demonstrated that he is not durable?

Again, where is the evidence that a smaller QB is more prone to injury than a bigger one. Hint...you aren't going to find it because there isn't any.

I don't think people are saying there is zero risk. I know I'm not. I just know that he won't be anymore likely to get hurt than Cam was. In fact Young will probably be more able to avoid injuries because of the way he manages himself. But you can never predict a catastrophic hit from a TJ Watt kind of guy or the open season allowed by refs on Cam against the Broncos in the Superbowl and the season opener the following season, but when those do happen, it won't matter... apparently...how big you are.

Regardless, it's an unfounded fear. Even if Reich believes it, there is no evidence to support it is more of a concern. It's just a feeling. Nothing more. Again, there are reasons to choose otherwise based on his height, but durability and injury probability has nothing to back it up in regards to smaller vs larger QBs.

Not that I doubt you, but show me.

You don't think that bias towards taller "prototypical build" QBs isn't a reason? Smaller statured QBs than the prototype big QB have not shown to be any more likely to be injured than their prototypical counterparts. That's just straight facts.

That he's more prone to injury because he's smaller?

I think Levis is much more likely to be seriously injured than Young.

Like I said, there is a legitimate case to be made for the ability to see the field from the pocket. Injury potential because of size is not a legitimate concern because it's based on nothing more than unsubstantiated fears.

A reason for what? If you're looking for one...I'm sure you can make it into a bigger deal than it actually is, but aside from that it's just a waste of time to project injury on a player without an injury history, especially when you aren't doing it for anyone else. If you don't like a player or just prefer another one, fine, but just admit it. You don't have to grasp at straws saying "he's small so he's more likely to get hurt than someone 2 inches taller" because history and statistics just don't bear that out.

Imo, there are reasons to believe that size is a factor, but potential for injury is not one of them. Unless a player has a injury history beyond what us normal for the position, it should not be a factor.

Is it a consideration or a "huge deal"?

The only reason height should come into question between Young and Stroud is the ability to scan the field from the pocket. Young is forced to be more mobile to get a better view of the field. He does it really well, but, again forced to choose, I'd rather have a QB who wasn't forced to be mobile so he could see the field better. Focused in on a potential to be injured on a player with no injury history is waste of time.

Same feeling I've had all a long.... Forced to choose, Stroud, but totally happy with either one should I hear that name called. No regrets either way

i would take the word 'serious' out of it. he has concerns, but its no more than any other areas to consider. it's not like it carries more weight in the decision than anything else.

oh...i know. you see that's the thing that's so tough about all of this. if you say that one player does one thing better (in your opinion) then people assume that you are saying the other player cant. both are incredible and do so many things...pretty much everything... well. but with Young, IN MY OPINION, because of his stature i think he has to rely on his mobility more to scan the field. he's adapted well, i think, but i think it's largely out of necessity that he has to run around more than others who are taller so he can see the field better. I think Young can play from the pocket, but i think he's limited there and that he does better when he doesn't. Stroud can do it from both and do it from the pocket more consistently. Size is a factor here.

he didn't pull off a win, but it wasn't his fault that they didn't win. guy did an incredible performance without his best receivers.

how long did it take us to figure out that Rhule wasn't going to work out? how many of us thought that Clausen was a bad idea?