I'm surprised three games can apparently decide a professional quarterback's career.
Advertisement
by Tiami » Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:30 pm
by Idzequitch » Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:38 pm
by Idzequitch » Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:49 pm
by Tiami » Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:54 pm
by Outer Sparta » Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:55 pm
by Bythyrona » Wed Apr 22, 2015 2:59 pm
Outer Sparta wrote:Right now, the top two QBs on the Eagle's depth chart are Big Foot and Butt Fumble!!!
Bythyrona wrote:Mark Sanchez is Joe Flacco if he's drafted somewhere else. Those Jets offenses were downright talentless shit - fuck Braylon "0 CTH" Edwards. Sanchez is 4-2 in playoff games. I'm not saying I would lean on him at this point as a starter, but he's definitely great backup material. The Dirty Sanchez Hate Train has always ignored the far bigger problem of those Jets teams: terrible coaching (HURRDURR QB PLATOON SYSTEM HURRDURR) and downright moronic GMing by Idzik.
by Idzequitch » Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:06 pm
by Outer Sparta » Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:11 pm
by Bythyrona » Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:13 pm
Idzequitch wrote:Tiami wrote:9-7 overal record as starter and one playoff win. Hell, Matt Ryan has one playoff win and he's a pretty damn good quarterback.
Which only proves my point. He's has an above .500 winning percentage, and has as many playoff wins as Ryan, who, I agree, is a very good QB. You won't win the Super Bowl with Tebow, and he's isn't of starter caliber, but if you surround him with decent talent, he'll do better than the majority of backup QB's in the league.
by Idzequitch » Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:26 pm
Bythyrona wrote:Idzequitch wrote:Which only proves my point. He's has an above .500 winning percentage, and has as many playoff wins as Ryan, who, I agree, is a very good QB. You won't win the Super Bowl with Tebow, and he's isn't of starter caliber, but if you surround him with decent talent, he'll do better than the majority of backup QB's in the league.
Most backup QBs can complete >50% of their passes, so no, he's really not.
by Bythyrona » Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:33 pm
Idzequitch wrote:Bythyrona wrote:Most backup QBs can complete >50% of their passes, so no, he's really not.
Most backup QB's don't win playoff games. Hell, even Romo hasn't done that. Nor has Stafford, Dalton, or Newton.
Looking at the projected 2nd String QB's for every team this year, I'd take Tebow over almost all of them. We're talking about guys like Blaine Gabbert, Mike Glennon, Colt McCoy, and Ryan Lindley. If you wouldn't rather have Tebow than those guys, I don't have anything more to say to you.
by Idzequitch » Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:43 pm
Bythyrona wrote:Idzequitch wrote:Most backup QB's don't win playoff games. Hell, even Romo hasn't done that. Nor has Stafford, Dalton, or Newton.
Looking at the projected 2nd String QB's for every team this year, I'd take Tebow over almost all of them. We're talking about guys like Blaine Gabbert, Mike Glennon, Colt McCoy, and Ryan Lindley. If you wouldn't rather have Tebow than those guys, I don't have anything more to say to you.
I most certainly would rather have a Captain Checkdown in Glennon than a media circus who can't meet the bare minimum of standards to be an NFL QB. I'd rather have Tebow than Gabbert, and that's it.
by Bythyrona » Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:02 pm
Idzequitch wrote:Bythyrona wrote:I most certainly would rather have a Captain Checkdown in Glennon than a media circus who can't meet the bare minimum of standards to be an NFL QB. I'd rather have Tebow than Gabbert, and that's it.
And yet Glennon is 5-13 as a starter. McCoy's 7-18. Lindley has only won a single game. Tebow has a winning record, and the win/loss column is really the only stat that matters. I'd rather go to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman, than miss the playoffs with Tom Brady.
by Idzequitch » Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:13 pm
Bythyrona wrote:Idzequitch wrote:And yet Glennon is 5-13 as a starter. McCoy's 7-18. Lindley has only won a single game. Tebow has a winning record, and the win/loss column is really the only stat that matters. I'd rather go to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman, than miss the playoffs with Tom Brady.
...so you'd rather have a team with talent that makes a shitty QB look good. If you're seriously suggesting a team with a great surrounding cast makes a shitty QB somehow not shitty, I've got nothing more to say to you, because that's patently fucking absurd. Tom Brady over Rex Grossman. I haven't laughed that hard in awhile.
by Bythyrona » Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:32 pm
Idzequitch wrote:Bythyrona wrote:...so you'd rather have a team with talent that makes a shitty QB look good. If you're seriously suggesting a team with a great surrounding cast makes a shitty QB somehow not shitty, I've got nothing more to say to you, because that's patently fucking absurd. Tom Brady over Rex Grossman. I haven't laughed that hard in awhile.
I'd rather have a good team with a subpar QB than a bad team with a good QB, yes. Contrary to popular belief, the quarterback does not the entire team make.
by Idzequitch » Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:37 pm
Bythyrona wrote:Idzequitch wrote:I'd rather have a good team with a subpar QB than a bad team with a good QB, yes. Contrary to popular belief, the quarterback does not the entire team make.
Too bad I wasn't talking about the team around a QB. Also, W-L record is an utterly useless metric.
http://www.footballperspective.com/matt ... ive-value/
by Bythyrona » Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:03 pm
Idzequitch wrote:Bythyrona wrote:Too bad I wasn't talking about the team around a QB. Also, W-L record is an utterly useless metric.
http://www.footballperspective.com/matt ... ive-value/
Except you were. Record isn't necessarily a tangible indicator of future success or failure, but it's what matters. I'd rather have a QB who wins more often than not.
Stafford has a 17-28 career record, which in light of his recent contract extension, has caused people to criticize the Lions for giving big money to a player who is not a “winner.” There are legitimate reasons to criticize Stafford, so why would people fall back on statements like this? I’m sure Lions fans wish the team had won more games under Stafford, but that’s in the past. The real question — and the one faced by Lions management before giving him the extension — is whether his current career record has any predictive value when it comes to his future record. [...] In [Steve] Young’s case, he went from the worst team in the league to the best, which helps to explain why his winning percentage went through the roof. That’s also a good counter to the argument of using records to judge quarterbacks.
by Maurepas » Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:30 pm
Idzequitch wrote:I'd rather have a good team with a subpar QB than a bad team with a good QB, yes. Contrary to popular belief, the quarterback does not the entire team make.
by Maurepas » Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:33 pm
by Tiami » Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:46 pm
Maurepas wrote:Tiami wrote:I'm surprised three games can apparently decide a professional quarterback's career.
I wouldn't take Tebow seriously on just about any other team. But Kelly is in a major rebuilding mode, and if he has the desire to do it(and I'm not sure he does, there's no reason to think this was anything but him taking on a vanity project) and is willing to build a team around playing to Tebow's strengths with a lot of Option and running, of which Kelly likes to do, then he could be successful. I think Tebow's biggest problems thus far have been teams unwilling to commit to him, he's been expected to run offenses designed around Tom Brady or Peyton Manning, and of course he's going to come up short in that scenario. He's garbage in that system. But Kelly's system? I think it could work if Kelly is willing to commit.
by Tiami » Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:48 pm
Bythyrona wrote:Idzequitch wrote:Except you were. Record isn't necessarily a tangible indicator of future success or failure, but it's what matters. I'd rather have a QB who wins more often than not.
No, I wasn't. I was talking about an individual QB's skill, or Tebow's lack thereof.
wat
That statement makes no sense. At all. A QB who can COMPLETE A PASS is far more likely to win than one who can't. You're ignoring everything that article said, which blatantly refutes the ignorant and obsolete notion that QB wins matters.Stafford has a 17-28 career record, which in light of his recent contract extension, has caused people to criticize the Lions for giving big money to a player who is not a “winner.” There are legitimate reasons to criticize Stafford, so why would people fall back on statements like this? I’m sure Lions fans wish the team had won more games under Stafford, but that’s in the past. The real question — and the one faced by Lions management before giving him the extension — is whether his current career record has any predictive value when it comes to his future record. [...] In [Steve] Young’s case, he went from the worst team in the league to the best, which helps to explain why his winning percentage went through the roof. That’s also a good counter to the argument of using records to judge quarterbacks.
QB wins is one of the meaningless statistics in all of sports, and it's utterly laughable that you assert anything to the contrary. "All he does is win" is a phrase only meaning that a bad QB lucked out on a good team.
by Maurepas » Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:11 pm
Tiami wrote:I'm all for Tebow, but I was referring to Johnny Manziel.
by Idzequitch » Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:00 am
Bythyrona wrote:Idzequitch wrote:Except you were. Record isn't necessarily a tangible indicator of future success or failure, but it's what matters. I'd rather have a QB who wins more often than not.
No, I wasn't. I was talking about an individual QB's skill, or Tebow's lack thereof.
wat
That statement makes no sense. At all. A QB who can COMPLETE A PASS is far more likely to win than one who can't. You're ignoring everything that article said, which blatantly refutes the ignorant and obsolete notion that QB wins matters.Stafford has a 17-28 career record, which in light of his recent contract extension, has caused people to criticize the Lions for giving big money to a player who is not a “winner.” There are legitimate reasons to criticize Stafford, so why would people fall back on statements like this? I’m sure Lions fans wish the team had won more games under Stafford, but that’s in the past. The real question — and the one faced by Lions management before giving him the extension — is whether his current career record has any predictive value when it comes to his future record. [...] In [Steve] Young’s case, he went from the worst team in the league to the best, which helps to explain why his winning percentage went through the roof. That’s also a good counter to the argument of using records to judge quarterbacks.
QB wins is one of the meaningless statistics in all of sports, and it's utterly laughable that you assert anything to the contrary. "All he does is win" is a phrase only meaning that a bad QB lucked out on a good team.
Maurepas wrote:Idzequitch wrote:I'd rather have a good team with a subpar QB than a bad team with a good QB, yes. Contrary to popular belief, the quarterback does not the entire team make.
I disagree, just due to the nature of what the game has become. I've seen Tom Brady take subpar teams deep in the playoffs consistently. I've seen Houston consistently fail to make the playoffs.
The difference is in QB play. A Franchise QB is the lynchpin of any decent team in the NFL. The past decade has really borne this out through the haves and the have-nots.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], The Scandoslavic Empire
Advertisement