Since you didnt read the thread here are the cliffnotes:
I did read the thread. However, I did not set up straw-man arguments like you did.
" Rick is good enough to be a backup QB in the NFL "- NevadaHawk
Well, he was on the Lions practice roster last year and the Patriots are now giving him an opportunity. I'm not sure why NevadaHawk's opinion should be considered out of line, or how it suggests that he thinks he knows more than NFL coaches.
"I thought Stanzi could make every throw. I mean how bad could he have been that the Chiefs never even gave him a sniff?"
Again, I don't interpret this statement to mean the author thought he knew more than NFL coaches. Stanzi had a good arm, which is why the Chiefs drafted him. Moreover, the author expressly asks the question of how bad Stanzi must have been in order for the Chiefs not to give him a chance to take a regular season snap. We don't know what Stanzi looked like in practice - hence the question.
Which post are you attributing this to? I was the first to bring up Warner, but I assume you are not attributing this to me because within my post I also said:
"I'm definitely not trying to make the case that Stanzi was the next Brady or Warner."
Thus, I assume you attribute it to aristotleiowa's post where he said
"As noted, had Green not gotten hurt, Kurt Warner would have been another Stanzi." If this is true, then you have clearly set up a straw-man argument because he was not saying Stanzi is as good as Warner. The point he was making is that had Warner never received a chance to take a snap in the NFL, none of us would know who he is - and Warner only got a chance to play because another player got hurt.
This surely must be targeted at aristotleiowa's post as well where he said
"Stanzi was a better college QB than Kirk Cousins, too, but Cousins has been given NFL opportunities Stanzi has not." Notice, however, that he said Stanzi was a better college QB than Cousins - he did not say that Stanzi is, or would have been, a better NFL QB than Cousins.
In this instance, I disagree with aristotleiowa's assertion, because I think Cousins was just as productive as Stanzi was in college, and Cousins was also drafted higher (4th round vs. 5th round). At the same time, just because I disagree with the assertion does not mean I will interpret it to mean something beyond what the author intended. He never claimed to know more about Stanzi's ability than the NFL coaches who have seen him. The thesis of his whole post was that nobody really knows what they have with a QB until they give him a chance to play in a real game. I don't find that assertion to be unreasonable.
In summary, you answer should have been nobody - nobody in this thread has claimed to know more about Stanzi's abilities than NFL coaches.
