Malcolm wrote:Then they should have traded for one already established instead of rolling the dice on a first rounder,
and who exactly would that be? Alex Smith? he was the only QB on the market this past off season. He's ok, and has had some success of late, but San Fran had no problem getting rid of him. It's not like teams are dangling franchise QB's for the taking.
The Browns only hope is to get one through the draft. Trent was a solid, hard running RB, but in his 300+ carries since he was drafted last year he has only had 2 runs over 20 yards! thats a fact. Hardly the gamebraking RB that warranted a 3rd overall draft pick.
The Browns only hope is to get one through the draft. Trent was a solid, hard running RB, but in his 300+ carries since he was drafted last year he has only had 2 runs over 20 yards! thats a fact. Hardly the gamebraking RB that warranted a 3rd overall draft pick.
You don't need an awesome QB to make it in the NFL, you just need a good enough one who isn't going to turn the ball over every drive. Fucking Trent Dilfer won a championship, but it wasn't because of his l33tness as a QB. For the record, Alex Smith is a hell of an upgrade over whatever Weedon. Hell, I'd consider Christian Ponder an upgrade over Weedon.
Edited By Malcolm on 1379605587
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Malcolm wrote:You don't need an awesome QB to make it in the NFL, you just need a good enough one who isn't going to turn the ball over every drive.
Its not like that anymore.
Here is the list of the last 10 Super Bowl winning QB's.
Joe Flacco, Eli Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Fuck face Ben, Payton Manning, and Tom Brady.
I'd say thats a list of pretty elite QB's, not just game managers. Trent Dilfer was an anomoly that just had one of the great defenses of all time.
If Alex Smith or Christian Ponder win the Super Bowl i eat my words, but i highly doubt it.
Bottom line, a team needs an elite QB if you wanna win the Super Bowl. Sure you can get a serviceable QB and maybe make the playoffs, but to win it, you need elite.
Joe Flacco, Eli Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Fuck face Ben, Payton Manning, and Tom Brady.
Joe, Ben, and Eli aren't in the same league as the others. Eli might be except for his wildly inconsistent performances.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Stranger wrote:regardless, the Browns suck, and i've gotta keep eating these poop sandwiches that Cleveland keeps serving up.
Trading Richardson for what could be a worthless pick (I would laugh so hard if they picked Manziel) isn't a way to improve your chances of winning.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
According to coach Rob Chudzinski, the move wasn't about Richardson being a poor fit in Cleveland's offense.
"This really has nothing to do with Trent from that standpoint," the first-year coach said. "The opportunity as an organization was there for us to have the chance to get better ultimately. We felt like it was the right decision after all."
Banner seconded that thought.
"This wasn't something negative about Trent, as much as it was the value that we think we got in terms of what we feel we need to do to move the franchise forward and get it to where we want it to be," he said. "We thought this positioned us well to do that.
I want some of whatever these dudes are smoking/snorting/eating/drinking.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
You either need an elite QB or an amazing defense. It's no coincidence that Baltimore and SF had top 10 defenses. In fact, if you go look, very, very few low ranked defenses make it far in the playoffs.
Joe, Ben, and Eli aren't in the same league as the others.
You are wrong on top of wrong.
Eli has two super bowl rings to show he's in the top ten QBs in the league.
Ben also has two.
Tom Brady has three, but none since his team was caught cheating, which they were doing when he won his three... On top of that, he got hurt one year and Matt Cassell went 11-5 there. Brady is overrated. He's a system guy.
Of your "elite" QBs, tell me which ones could play in Pittsburgh's no offensive line system where Ben has been hit 100 times more than the second place guy over the past few years (MNF stat).
I'm not saying he's better, I'm just saying that you're basing your opinion on stats, but not looking for the story behind them.
Some day people will think Barry Bonds was the greatest HR hitter ever if they just look at the stats.
"Happy slaves are the worst enemies of freedom." - Marie Von Ebner
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..." - Orwell
Of your "elite" QBs, tell me which ones could play in Pittsburgh's no offensive line system where Ben has been hit 100 times more than the second place guy over the past few years (MNF stat).
He's elite because he makes a durable tackling dummy?
Eli has two super bowl rings to show he's in the top ten QBs in the league.
I'm not calling the top ten "elite." I'm not calling any "top [insert number here]" list to be definitive role call of "elite." Stats determine the tiers of quality for a set of players.
Brady is overrated. He's a system guy.
Take Matt Cassell right now and throw him in the Patriots offense. He'd get slaughtered. Systems change with the personnel in them. Brady has consistently been a good QB. I might as well flip a fucking coin for Eli. Does it help that Bill relentlessly makes all his dudes conform to his idea of what a football offense should be? Kind of. But Bill's not the dude out there executing the plays.
I'm just saying that you're basing your opinion on stats, but not looking for the story behind them.
Some day people will think Barry Bonds was the greatest HR hitter ever if they just look at the stats.
Only if you ignore his stats prior to the turn of the century. Before then, he's just another solid outfielder that could go 30-30. Contrast that against someone with real talent, like Hank Aaron. There's a clear disconnect in the stats where certain scores start jumping. Not too many players in their mid thirties start seeing a massive uptick in home runs and slugging percentage.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Elite or not, call it what you will. If your team is going to win or even go to the Super Bowl you better have one helluva QB.
Hell, with the exception of Dilfer and Brad Johnson i can go back 20 years and say all QB's that won the super bowl are elite.
Warner, Elway, Farve, Aikmen, and Young. Shall i continue?
Sure some people are gonna say Brady is a system guy and would fail elswhere. But so what, that doesn't matter, what matters is he wins in the system he is in and gets the job done. Period.
Ben, prolly not the smartest QB ever, and maybe his star is fading. But goddamnit, that mother fucker keeps his team in the game and gets the job done. Even when everything else around him is falling apart. I've seen it way too many times.
Eli, very up and down. But when the biggest games have been on the line he has won. He's got more rings than his brother.
The bottom line in this league is winning. QB's get way to much credit for winning and take way to much blame for the losses. But in the end the cream of the crop rises to the top, a great QB will get the job done over time and their team will prosper from it.
Hell, with the exception of Dilfer and Brad Johnson i can go back 20 years and say all QB's that won the super bowl are elite.
Flaccid Flacco? Really?
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
He's elite because he makes a durable tackling dummy?
He's elite because he can take that beating, yet still keep winning games. Who threw the greatest pass in SB history? Ben.
Stats determine the tiers of quality for a set of players.
That's wrong, but even if it were correct, Eli and Ben have double the rings Peyton and Aaron have, and if you added Drew's you still wouldn't equal their rings.
SB wins is kind of an important stat. Ask Dan Marino.
Take Matt Cassell right now and throw him in the Patriots offense. He'd get slaughtered. Systems change with the personnel in them. Brady has consistently been a good QB. I might as well flip a fucking coin for Eli. Does it help that Bill relentlessly makes all his dudes conform to his idea of what a football offense should be? Kind of. But Bill's not the dude out there executing the plays.
I disagree. I think Bill would coach him to run the system that he's used forever. The system hasn't changed, just personnel. And don't pretend there were stars there before. NE has always had a rag tag bunch of nobodies with a few big names sprinkled in.
Also, it probably is in Tom's favor that he played behind the #1 O line in the NFL for the majority of his career. Completing passes is easier if you're not running for your life every play.
Only if you ignore his stats prior to the turn of the century. Before then, he's just another solid outfielder that could go 30-30. Contrast that against someone with real talent, like Hank Aaron. There's a clear disconnect in the stats where certain scores start jumping. Not too many players in their mid thirties start seeing a massive uptick in home runs and slugging percentage.
Who was it that hit the 61 back in the day? How many did he hit the previous 5 seasons? You don't know. Know why? Nobody gives a fuck.
And your argument is invalid anyway because you ignored my point by trying to look at the story behind the stats. You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Pick a side and live with your decision. Either stats are everything or they're not.
"Happy slaves are the worst enemies of freedom." - Marie Von Ebner
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..." - Orwell
Who was it that hit the 61 back in the day? How many did he hit the previous 5 seasons? You don't know. Know why? Nobody gives a fuck.
Actually, I do know. He had an unbelievably exceptional year, as did a number of Yankees that season. His home run curve (except for one year) looks like is almost symmetrical around the infamous 61 HR-year. That's why no one's been insane enough to argue for Maris over someone like Babe Ruth for power hitting.
That's wrong, but even if it were correct, Eli and Ben have double the rings Peyton and Aaron have, and if you added Drew's you still wouldn't equal their rings.
Other than stats, what are you going with? Gut feelings? Barry has a chemical test that says his results are bullshit.
SB wins is kind of an important stat. Ask Dan Marino.
For your legacy in the eyes of the fans, maybe. Statistically, he's got better numbers than Montana, Elway, Young et al. It's damn near criminal he gets remembered after those dudes.
Also, it probably is in Tom's favor that he played behind the #1 O line in the NFL for the majority of his career. Completing passes is easier if you're not running for your life every play.
Yeah, totally in his favour. It's also easier to be a QB if your D has a better than average chance of stopping the opponents from scoring. It's easier if the opposing team has a shitty punter. It's easier if you've got a Pro Bowl RB to keep the pass rush honest. I could go on.
Either stats are everything or they're not.
They're not everything but they count for the a fuckload unless you're arguing aesthetics. Stats tell stories. Looking at Barry's power numbers spike when he hits his mid thirties is a red flag.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Other than stats, what are you going with? Gut feelings? Barry has a chemical test that says his results are bullshit.
Again, you're trying to contradict your own previous statements to "win". I'm pointing out that if stats trump all, which is your argument, your list of elite QBs fails.
Also, Barry's test means shit. It was barely the smoking gun they wanted. It will be forgotten.
For your legacy in the eyes of the fans, maybe. Statistically, he's got better numbers than Montana, Elway, Young et al. It's damn near criminal he gets remembered after those dudes.
But it happens, proving my point.
Years from now, people will talk about the helmet catch, the insane Ben to Holmes throw, Ben's ability to escape, etc. They won't talk about completion percentages.
It's the Tin Cup logic.
The greatest tennis players in history weren't McEnroe, Bjorg, Conners, or Andre, but that's who people remember because of their personalities and what they did on the courts. Today's men are boring as fuck.
Yeah, totally in his favour. It's also easier to be a QB if your D has a better than average chance of stopping the opponents from scoring. It's easier if the opposing team has a shitty punter. It's easier if you've got a Pro Bowl RB to keep the pass rush honest. I could go on.
And it all works towards my argument about Tom.
Because the NFL ignored the snowplow, but stepped in for the tuck rule...
They're not everything but they count for the a fuckload unless you're arguing aesthetics. Stats tell stories. Looking at Barry's power numbers spike when he hits his mid thirties is a red flag.
Stats tell part of a story, they don't tell all of a story.
"Happy slaves are the worst enemies of freedom." - Marie Von Ebner
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..." - Orwell
I don't know every HR total from each career year as I'm not a goddamned sports almanac. I can tell you the curve starts in the teens and ends in the single digits, has 250ish total homers in it, peaks in the big year (61 in '61, naturally), then cuts to near 50% +/- 10% for the years surrounding it, and was in the. I know he ended his career with the Cesspool Deadbirds during the '67-68 season, and I know he started in '57. I know he hit under 10 HR more than a couple times. I know while he was a good power hitter, he, much like Manning the Lesser, was streaky as hell. Was he hitting 40 homers this year or 13? Was he batting in 100 RBIs or 50 (probably the latter)? Then again, I'm a bit of a baseball nerd, particularly for the more interesting players from '27 til about '95.
I'm pointing out that if stats trump all, which is your argument, your list of elite QBs fails.
You need a large asterisk to override the stats. A drug test does it, players throwing the game for money does it, etc. Other than that, I will fall back on stats more than almost anything else. Not all stats are created equal. Just because some dude is sky high for one number doesn't make it a purely positive thing. It's cool Ben can take hits. The fact he's taking that fucking many worries me.
Years from now, people will talk about the helmet catch, the insane Ben to Holmes throw, Ben's ability to escape, etc. They won't talk about completion percentages.
Another dude like Ben. Has a championship, fuckload of all-star appearances, MVP wins, and baseball nerds still talk about his five strikeouts during the '34 all-star game. You'll notice he's not in the hall of fame despite having a more than respectable ERA, record, and many other numbers. People don't talk about percentages because that's not what people typically do. They talk about the memories. But when you want to rank things instead of bask in nostalgia, you need more than memories.
Stats tell part of a story, they don't tell all of a story.
Granted. But I can trust the numbers and any misinterpretation is my fault.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
If I had to pick from the current starters:
Brady
Manning the Greater
Brees
Is it biased towards dudes who've been in the league a few years? Yeah. Takes time to be counted among the best.
Is it biased towards dudes who've been on winning teams? Well yeah, those QBs tend to have better numbers. While you may speculate on what would happen if their offensive lines had other players or if they were throwing to different wideouts or if they were in a different division, whatever, it is merely that -- speculation. The only hard evidence I have is the dudes they played with, threw to, and played against.
There are others that I might add to that list in a couple years. I'm extremely curious where the crop of "agile QBs" is going to end up considering the prototype, Vick, is scratching his mid thirties in a couple years.
What % of the NFL is reasonable for elite status?
Depends on the numbers. There's no clear cut answer. It's theoretically possible for everyone to suck evenly.
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
I don't know every HR total from each career year as I'm not a goddamned sports almanac.
Exactly my point.
You're trying to say that stats will tell the story, but my point is that while they do tell some of the story, they don't tell the whole story.
When people talk about "greatest QB ever", Marino is getting left out of the conversation a lot, and honestly, he's probably the second best ever. He doesn't get any credit though because he wasn't flashy, and didn't win the big games. Hell, the most he's been mentioned in the last decade was to compare Peyton's career to his until Peyton won his ring.
Stats can't talk about the scheme you're in, the line you have, the defense you have, your coach, your receivers, etc. That's their weakness.
To put this in other terms, let's bring in League of Legends. Each match tracks your kills, deaths, and assists. It also tracks how much gold you earned, and minions killed. You could be your team's ADC (damage dealer), and go into fights and melt enemy health, but have other folks on your team land a killing blow with an attack that does a small amount of damage. What does that do to your stats? It makes you look like you're not doing your job.
More importantly, and this applies more to football and LoL than baseball, your stats are usually very dependent on teammates, and stats don't show that.
Did you watch the Patriots last week? Outside of Edelman, there wasn't a Patriot on the field who could catch the ball.
Anyway, long story short, asterisks or not, stats do not and cannot tell the whole story.
If I had to pick from the current starters:
Brady
Manning the Greater
Brees
I will always argue that Brady does not belong in that list. He's a very good QB, but he's not elite. The system he plays in makes him seem elite.
And my point about Ben is that "elite" isn't always just about throwing the ball. No other QB could have won two super bowls with the Steelers during this time because no other QB has his physical abilities.
But yeah, to cut down on future walls of text, stick to this point if you still need to respond: Stats don't tell the whole story.
"Happy slaves are the worst enemies of freedom." - Marie Von Ebner
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..." - Orwell
"Happy slaves are the worst enemies of freedom." - Marie Von Ebner
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies..." - Orwell
