National Football League

[FoxxyBrown1111]

1.) Eli fans love that stat. That plus the 2 SB MVPs (on iffy stats). But as I've said before, Eli is not Peyton, and hes not Brady, Brees or Ryan either. If Eli were traded for someone like Ryan Fitzpatrick, or Sam Bradford, each team would likely have the same record. He's not bad, but he's not as great as his wins would indicate.

2.) Carolina is definitely a team for 2013-2016 or so.

3.) I do not favor expanding the NFL playoffs.

4.) I questioned how good Foles would be too, but while many kept insisting how much talent Vick had and his potential. I scoffed at that and questioned what he had ever done in his NFL career? No one can answer, because it's nothing. He isn't any better than a 3rd round rookie thrown into games mid season.

1.) Yeah, fragile Eli is the exact opposite of the brother. Eli is only 12th among active QB´s in Y/PP (20th in rating), while her bro, Nervous-PO-Peyton, is 2nd (3rd in rating) to?...
Yep, Mr. Romo!!
While Peyton´s teams almost every year are pre playoff SB-Favo´s, Eli´s teams are seldom if at all considered as SB-Contenders. And yet due sheer luck, Eli has one more ring in less time.
And yes even "his" SB wins were unimpressive. Scoring 17 and 21 points, while the other SB scores 10% percent more points compared to the yearly regular season. It´s no secret that the defense performances and incredible luck and misfortune by opponents got him the rings.

2.) fixed for you...

3.) Me too. It´s just another trick to milk the fans. What a BS. Soon we´ll have 7-9 teams as SB-"Champs". Welcome to the CFL/NHL: Completely meaningless regular seasons...

4.) Vick had an amazing improvement since he played as PHI starter. Don´t know what happened this year, back to his ATL "form". I can´t explain it, but you are right anyway. This year was bad.
OTOH he had some stellar performances in 2010 and 2011 thanks to his powerful arm...

 

[Amsterhammer]

Welcome back Foxxy, and welcome to the RG3 fan club.

Either you guys have memories like mine was 30 years ago, or you have instant access to all these stats and names from the past. I can't believe that you guys run around with all that info just sitting there in the back of your heads.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Welcome back Foxxy, and welcome to the RG3 fan club.

Either you guys have memories like mine was 30 years ago, or you have instant access to all these stats and names from the past. I can't believe that you guys run around with all that info just sitting there in the back of your heads.

Long time ago i entered the RG3 fanclub (actually in since that now (for me) famous Saints-Game; even 5 yard slants were beautiful to watch). But thanks anyway.

And since we have so many rankings in here nowadays, let me give my two cents;
My Top-5-Active-QB´s:
1. RG3 (i know it´s early, but i am still impressed of what i saw in 15 minutes of play)
2. Brees (due his amazing accuracy)
3. Roethlisberger (hate to admit it)
4. Newton (might be also too early to judge)
5. Brady or Rodgers (is one of them a system QB, or even both?), i can´t decide

My Top-5-QB´s i saw playing in my life:
1. Marino (by a mile or two)
2. Warner (just look how much better he was than his direct replacements; outside of his awful 2002 season of course, but which QB didn´t have a bad season?)
3. Elway (he was beautiful to watch from start to finish, poetry in motion, and every game seemed to be an instant classic)
4. Moon (best spiral ever, 6 (?) CFL championships, HC trusted his arm so much, that even running teams like MIN transformed to heavy pass teams with him)
5. McMahon (Ditka and Kotite praised him, not w/o a reason, Kotite went so far to "thank god for McMahon" when Cunningham went down in 1991, he certainly gave it all, his injuries show for it)

My Top-5-QB´s whom i didn´t saw playing (so i have to trust what i read, the numbers and championships):
1. Namath (a lot to do with what Alpe said about him; and he was a lot like BigMäc, gave it all, injured often, but when healthy simply amazing)
2. Luckman (in CHI !!! ahead of time in passing)
3. Unitas (he transformed the NFL into a passing league, ok forget the 70s )
4. Baugh (like Luckman and Unitas, ahead of time)
5. Fouts or Graham (System QB´s or not?; anyway both were either ahead of time (Fouts) or simply "unbeatable" (Graham), so they belong here)

My Top-5-QB´s who didn´t make the NFL:
1. Rohan Davey (he was like RG3, only Belicheat missused him in his offense. Anyway wrong time, wrong team, wrong system. Unlucky. Actually i shouldn´t blame Belicheat. The offense was just made for Brady.)
2. Toby Korrodi (mostly hearsay, but teammates praised him as good as anyone, plus his famous NFL-Combine. Might have been the 2nd coming of Warner. Nobody knows.)
3. Clifford Madison (the QB of our local team in the 80s. Honestly this guy threw 80 yard passes in the air at least once per game. The spiral was as tight as that of Elway or Moon. In the best season our Berlin Eagles outscored the opponents like 747-10 in 10 games. It was absurd, but never boring. Everybody came to see this sensational QB)
4. Doug Flutie (ok, he was in the NFL, but "lost" his prime years in Canada, and only after that, he had his last hurrah in the NFL at grandpa stage.)
5. Damon Allen (he must have been great, playing 23 seasons in CFL, being an outstanding pitcher, and of course holds the all time pro passing record with 72.000+ yards, the genes were there since his bro was RB Marcus Allen).

I didn´t mention true system QB´s like for example all those SF-Guys who also had the greatest WR of all time around.
Neither Montana nor Young had an at least average arm. Both played the "dunk the ball to Rice/Taylor, then they´ll sprint 90 yards into the endzone to pad the QB-Stats".
I credit most of the 49ers sucsess to Walsh, the WRs and a system that was perfect.

 

[Tom T.]

Considering Montana, Brady and Rodgers as system quarterbacks tends to make me believe you don't know much about quarterbacking. That, and putting Cam Newton and a rookie above them. And no mention of Peyton Manning?

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

It´s my two cents, so you don´t have to like it.
BTW, i talked about QB´s, not team performance... just that little hint for you; Cassel put up the same stats as Brady in NE, he goes to another team and there you see...! Same with the Young´s, DeBerg´s, Detmer´s or whoever in this world.

No i didn´t know much about QB-Play. But now i know: If a team wins, the QB is great, if a team loses, he´s bad. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Next time around, just base your critic on facts, but don´t criticise for the sake of criticising. ESPN is there for you. We rather discuss here...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Agree on RGIII, he has transformed the entire beloved patriot organization, and played great. He still has so much potential we've just begun to see. I don't know that I'd have him at 1 though. I also think Luck deserves more credit than you're giving him. Look at what's happened in Indy.

Did you see Brady last week against Houston? It was one perfect pass after another after another, against a supposedly great defense.

Mostly agree on Big Ben. He has the ability to move around in the pocket to keep plays alive and then find receivers better than any QB in the NFL. Partly because of his size. But injuries are taking their toll. This is why you want a big QB, and why Newton (and maybe Foles) will always have a job. If you're big and strong, and can throw the ball at least fairly well and follow the playbook, you'll likely find a home.

Montana was definitely a clutch QB though, cool as a cucumber. You may not be old enough to remember Steve Bono. He played just about as well as Montana's replacement as Young. Joe was somewhat of a system QB, and yes had the best player ever to throw to, but he made big throws and big plays when big games were on the line, as much as any QB ever.

I agree with you on Warner. This guy did more than anyone asked, and though he didn't have a cannon of an arm, he had a strong enough one considering he was very accurate deep.

I remember Dan Fouts, and he was a hell of a QB in a throw always offense. Heck of a nice guy too.

The problem I have with Moon is that he wthrew for thousands of yards between the 10 yard lines, or when games were out of hand. He did throw beautiful spirals with great motion, but he was the opposite of Montana. I just saw Warren turn mediocre in way too many big games.

Thanks for tossing Namath in there. People over about 50 might remember him, but he too had great deep accuracy and perfect motion. But he was tough as hell and definitely made his teams better, no question.

You're biased, with McMahon, but he was definitely very tough and gave everything to the sport. Considering he played much of his career injured, and still played quite well says something.

QB's that never made it was interesting. I'd like to see one of Madison's 80 yard throws though. It sounds like urban legend, like Jim Druckenmiller being able to throw from goal line to goal line, which of course no one ever captured on tape, because it was BS (though he did have one of the biggest arms ever, and biggest head case ever).

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Agree on RGIII, he has transformed the entire beloved patriot organization, and played great. He still has so much potential we've just begun to see. I don't know that I'd have him at 1 though. I also think Luck deserves more credit than you're giving him. Look at what's happened in Indy.

Did you see Brady last week against Houston? It was one perfect pass after another after another, against a supposedly great defense.

Mostly agree on Big Ben. He has the ability to move around in the pocket to keep plays alive and then find receivers better than any QB in the NFL. Partly because of his size. But injuries are taking their toll. This is why you want a big QB, and why Newton (and maybe Foles) will always have a job. If you're big and strong, and can throw the ball at least fairly well and follow the playbook, you'll likely find a home.

Montana was definitely a clutch QB though, cool as a cucumber. You may not be old enough to remember Steve Bono. He played just about as well as Montana's replacement as Young. Joe was somewhat of a system QB, and yes had the best player ever to throw to, but he made big throws and big plays when big games were on the line, as much as any QB ever.

I agree with you on Warner. This guy did more than anyone asked, and though he didn't have a cannon of an arm, he had a strong enough one considering he was very accurate deep.

I remember Dan Fouts, and he was a hell of a QB in a throw always offense. Heck of a nice guy too.

The problem I have with Moon is that he wthrew for thousands of yards between the 10 yard lines, or when games were out of hand. He did throw beautiful spirals with great motion, but he was the opposite of Montana. I just saw Warren turn mediocre in way too many big games.

Thanks for tossing Namath in there. People over about 50 might remember him, but he too had great deep accuracy and perfect motion. But he was tough as hell and definitely made his teams better, no question.

You're biased, with McMahon, but he was definitely very tough and gave everything to the sport. Considering he played much of his career injured, and still played quite well says something.

QB's that never made it was interesting. I'd like to see one of Madison's 80 yard throws though. It sounds like urban legend, like Jim Druckenmiller being able to throw from goal line to goal line, which of course no one ever captured on tape, because it was BS (though he did have one of the biggest arms ever, and biggest head case ever).

Thanks for the flowers. Now that i call a discussion with a basis.

The only way for RG3 to "choke" is either injury or future psychological problems. Otherwise he might end up as the best all time.

Since "clutch play" evens out over the long run, the judge (me ) is still out on Luck. Either he starts to play 60 mins, or he once will wonder where all the 4th Qtr comebacks are gone (the guys at all kind of research sites come to the same conclusion: as early as one season later all those close game records of 7-1 do even out or worse, go the other direction).

No, no, i just came back now. So i didn´t saw him. But surely i believe you that Brady picked the D apart with precise pass after pass. I guess he had all the time in the world to set, scan the field, and then step into his throws with a perfect follow through to get the ball to the open receiver untouched (i witnessed this many times the past few years).
As one scout once said: "Every NFL-QB can pick any D apart if given enough time to throw" (Me, i wouldn´t go that far if i just remember the ugly throws of Cade McNown or Rick Mirer).
Anyway, i still think Brady is a lot better than his replacements. That´s why i have him in my T-5. And he never had terrible meltdowns like PO-Peyton. He lost his games in style, at least... That´s why Peyton isn´t in my T-5 BTW.

I remember Bono-Young-Montana-Grbac. All of them. All posted the same effieciency numbers. It´s not that Montana didn´t have his bad PO-Games either. They are just forgotten (like the NYG clobbering in 1986, or the unable to score enough TD´s game in 1990). Anyway, Montana was cool and very very successful. No doubt. But he still was a system QB with great talent around him and the best Offense mind back then (Walsh). And he had an below average NFL-Arm. I guess at least 60* other QB´s of his time would have had the same career outcome as Montana. He was just incredible lucky. In the right place, at the right time, with the perfect system to hide his weaknesses and all lucky bounces in the right time (for example just one snap before his TD to Taylor, Billups (?) dropped the 100% sure game saving INT; or all those 60 yard "clutch" TD-Passes... in reality all of them were 5yd slants or outs to Taylor/Rice who danced their ways into the EZ).

... more later ...

* Now the heat will come my way. I am ready for the clobbering.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Clifford Madison:

OMG, that was the greaties, the 80s. Those Berlin Adler were a lot like the 85-Bears.
First there was the names;
Clarence Rambo, the RB (like Stallone)
Stefan Mücke, the DT (a name like the famous movie with Bud Spencer)
... and then the stories (live seen)
Like this one:
Score is 23-23 in the 89-German-Bowl, inside TMW, ball at midfield. The audience is silent, in waiting for something special. Indeed something special was in the air.
Madison drops back to pass and heaves one of his famous passes into the EZ... TD. The crowd runs mad. But wait. A flag... Offensive holding. Game over. No, no... Madison drops back again, another heave into the EZ... TD, again. Wow. But wait. Too much time left for Cologne. Oh §hit...
And here comes Mücke. The DT (!!!) clinches the game with an INT.
BTW, AFIR, Madison threw 400+ that night, and the running game was not present (Rambo had like minus 4 yds rushing for the game!)
What a game. The beer is running the whole night. How did we make it home to Berlin from Nürnberg? I don´t know.

Yes, Madison threw them 80 yards in the air. We even "prayed" for short KO returns, just to see the bombs week-in-week-out. Those days never come back.

One year later, another thriller. Berlin scores behind Madisons passing, Colonge behind QB Davis running. In the end he couldn´t keep up, so BER won 50-38. Another drunk train drive home. This time from Düsseldorf. One more (final) hallelujah yet another year later: Another thriller against Davis in Hamburg. Final score is 22-21. That was it... until Rohan Davey arrived for one famous year in the spring of 2004.

PS:
Mücke and Madison in their final days (1995)

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Well, obviously you didn't watch the Patriots-Texans game, or you would not have made such an inane post.

I would also argue Vick did not have a very good year last season. He cost his team some wins, his stats weren't very impressive and he contributed little to the "dream team", regardless of how high his YPP was (which is actually a team stat as much as individual, as Merckx pointed out quite a few posts ago). His completion percentage and QB rating were low, and his TD/INT ratio 18/14. No, in ten years Vick had two good years, somewhat in 2003 with a good playoff win, and in 2010. That's it. He's quite possibly the most over-hyped player in the game today, in years. All because he can scramble and run, which borders on uncoachable. As to why he's no longer playing, it's because he sucks. He's a turnover machine who makes bad decisions and poor throws as a QB. While some pundits kept saying "just wait" the guys on NFC Playbook, who all supported him before the start of the season, would routinely analyze his play and point out his poor decision making. He eventually left a game with a concussion, and despite healing and being completely cleared, Andy Reid sat him, and said they were going with Foles for the rest of the year. As I said, comparing their stats isn't very fair considering Nick had to jump in at the worst possible time, with virtually zero reps with the first team, and he's a rookie.

I'll let someone else take a stab at your comments on Montana.

Here's Jaws list of the top 30 QB's in the NFL heading into this season. His reasoning is pretty sound when you break it down.

Since you do like to chat about arm strength, here's a cool link to a Bleacher Report article listing them from 1-32 at the start of the season. Not to give it away, but I guessed #5, #2 and #4 at the top, followed by 1, and 10. To me #12 is way too high. 24 could perhaps move up a few points, but isn't accurate deep, and 29 has shown this year he belongs several points higher as well. As Jaws says, it's definitely important, though not everything, or Boller and Russell would be leading the NFL today.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Well, obviously you didn't watch the Patriots-Texans game.

As Jaws says, it's definitely important, though not everything, or Boller and Russell would be leading the NFL today.

No i couldn´t watch, i said it from the beginning. I wasn´t around.
I just saw Brady from 2011 and before. Still, he made my personal T-5. So there is no problem at all i think.

Russell had mental issues. The same thing happens to weak armed QB´s (there are many, many).
I don´t know where this Boller stuff comes from. All i heard is that he threw the ball from his knees trou the goal posts.
So when you have got many strong armed QB´s, a lot of them bust, of course. OTOH, there are many famous ones (Favre, Testa, Schroeder, Elway, Cunningham, etc, etc, etc).
And if you have many weak arms who made it into the NFL (just wonder how), even more bust (like Mirer, McNown, Frye, Hanie, Greisen, Krenzel, Booty, Brennan, etc, etc, etc).
After all, i take the strong armed accurate QB any time over the weak armed accurate QB.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Late breaking horror news -

"Robert Griffin III will not play for Redskins vs. Browns on Sunday"

 

[Merckx index]

The great thing about Foxxy is he always provokes, er…discussion. Yes, Montana had some bad playoff games (though 1986 wasn’t really his fault; he got knocked out of the game in the first half, and before that happened, he threw a perfect TD strike to Rice, who improbably dropped the ball while running towards the endzone. The Giants recovered in the endzone. Had the ball bounced a few yards further, the 49ers would have retained possession; a few yards less, and the Giants would have been pinned near their own goal line. Even back in those days, the Giants were lucky at a statistically improbable level).

But all those TD passes to Rice weren’t catch-and-run. In one of the turning points in Rice’s career (because it finally helped him throw off the albatross of the 1986 dropped ball), Montana threw a deep bomb to him that beat the Giants in a regular season game in 1988. That was sort of the signal that the 49ers were a force to reckon with, and indeed, they won their 3d SB that year, and Rice’s first. He was MVP in that SB. Or how about those long passes that featured the 49ers remarkable comeback against the Eagles in early 1989, when Montana threw four TD passes in the 4th quarter? They went on to win another SB that year.

Montana did not have the strongest arm, but he could throw the deep ball to Rice. In any case, I think you overrate arm strength. Montana was one of the most accurate passers ever, and what might be the single most important trait of a QB, had a superb sense of timing. Sure, Walsh's system made it look easy, someone was always open, but only for a fraction of a second. You had to get the ball to him then and there. Probably no one was better at crossing patterns and quick slant-ins, seam patterns on rhythm and the like, though Fouts was a master at those, too.

In any case, you better be careful in arguing that Montana was ordinary because his backups were successful. Could apply the same argument to your current man-crush. Seems like every time RG3 goes down, Cousins steps in and plays just as well. Could it be the offensive unit of the Skins makes a larger contribution to their success than is acknowledged by RG3 fans? Not to mention that one of the big reasons RG3 has a huge statistical edge on Luck is because the Skins receivers run much further after the catch than the Indy receivers do. If RG3 doesn’t play Sunday and the Skins win, look for more speculation along those lines.

Can’t believe Madden said Rodgers and Flacco are on the same level. Serious? Rodgers is the career leader in passing efficiency, set the single season record last year, has won an MVP and a SB. What has Flacco done? I wouldn’t even put Flacco in the top ten. Manning and Brady may be in a class of their own, but Rodgers and Brees are close, and I might Rothlisberger in that group, too. Not the prettiest QB out there, but he sure makes a huge difference to that offense. After that, we can argue about Ryan, Schaub, Rivers, E. Manning, etc., as second tier.

ChrisE, don’t despair! Yes, the Houston defense has imploded, the team is maybe now third best in the AFC. But so what? Only once in the past fifteen years (Pats, 2003) has the team with the best record won the SB. Houston is actually in a pretty good position. Assuming they don’t collapse in the final three games, they should get a first round bye. Of their likely opponents in the divisional game, only Denver should be favored. They can beat the Ravens, Indy, the banged-up Steelers and Cincy. So I think they’re likely to get to the title game. They would probably meet NE there, which will certainly be favored, but who knows? Far stranger things happen in the postseason every year. Who thought the Giants would beat GB last year? Who thought Denver would beat the Steelers? Who thought NE would score only seventeen points in the SB?

Agree with the poster who says expanding the playoff teams is a bad idea. It’s hard to get a good balance. Too few, and most teams are out of the postseason picture near the end of the season, and fans of those teams lose interest. Too many, and the season doesn’t mean much. Also, as we discussed here last year, the more playoff games you play, the greater the chances of a bad game, meaning teams with the best, most consistent play during the regular season are more likely to get upset. One current feature I like is the first round bye, which rewards the top two division winners. But if the format is extended to sixteen teams, eight in each conference, then presumably all eight will play three rounds just to determine who goes to the SB. That will increase the chances for upsets.

I think it was Alpe who said it was only a matter of time before an 8-8 or 7-9 team gets to the SB. Expanding the playoff teams will not necessarily increase the number of teams like that, because you can’t get in as a wild card with a record like that. You have to play in a weak division, and division winners will get in under any likely system. But it will increase the chances that a team without the best record will go to the SB.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

The great thing about Foxxy is he sometimes provokes, er…discussion. ...

Fixed, but true anyway.

In any case, you better be careful in arguing that Montana was ordinary because his backups were successful. Could apply the same argument to your current man-crush. Seems like every time RG3 goes down, Cousins steps in and plays just as well. Could it be the offensive unit of the Skins makes a larger contribution to their success than is acknowledged by RG3 fans? Not to mention that one of the big reasons RG3 has a huge statistical edge on Luck is because the Skins receivers run much further after the catch than the Indy receivers do. If RG3 doesn’t play Sunday and the Skins win, look for more speculation along those lines.

Splits by distance of throws:
RG3 Y/Att (Rating)
BLOS; 4.5 (94)
1-10; 6.0 (90)
11-20; 13.9 (110)
21-30; 18.2 (147)
31+; 14.5 (118)

Luck Y/Att (Rating)
BLOS; 4.7 (87)
1-10; 6.0 (79)
11-20; 8.7 (64)
21-30; 10.6 (86)
31+; 8.2 (56)

What do we see? On throws behind the line of scrimmage (BLOS) both RG3 and Luck average about 4 1/2 Y/Att.
On the other short throws (1-10 yds "air travel") both perform about the same too (6.0 Y/Att).
From 11+ yds on the stats show what i (and Simms) preach since april; arm strength is needed sometimes on difficult throws. No wonder bionic super man outperforms Luck by a whopping 5+ Y/Att (!!!!). Those numbers certainly will regress to the mean (when the sample sizes grow), but it´s obvious where the difference between RG3 and Luck lays...

OK, here we go. As Amsterhammer informed us, RG3 won´t play. I officially change my pick to CLE. (Too bad, i really looked forward to see RG3 in the playoffs. Another defensive cheap shot destroyed a season. Hope rules will be changed more and more, until the beauty of technique & motion prevails over brute senseless "defensive" strength )

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I may still stick with the Skins. Cousins has filled in well, took most of the snaps this week, and for those who remember him in college he was a pocket passer who didn't make many mistakes, while starting three years at Michigan State as the team captain. His velocity is good, but he's not accurate deep the way RGIII is (few are). Plus Cleveland's defensive secondary in average. A bigger question may still be the improving Weeden versus the improving beloved patriot pass defense.

Plus, as Foxxy likes to say, the QB may be the most important position, but it's still only 1 of 11.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Plus, as Foxxy likes to say, the QB may be the most important position, but it's still only 1 of 11.

Actually it´s 1/22 (outside kickers & punters).
Anyway, about the importance of QB-Play:
The best study was made by the guys of ProFootballProspectus in 2003 AFIR.
Even tough on a small sample size, they found out that on average the Starting-QB´s won approx. 1 more game during a season than their replacements (other studies showed more influence of the starting QB, but to me the methods looked doubtful).
Anyway, it means for example instead of going 9-7 with a replacement, the same team would go 10-6 with the true starting QB.
But that can be explained b/c the Starter has wayyy more reps in training with the 1st team offense (while the backup "pretends" to be the coming opponents QB in training with the 2nd team offense), has more knowledge of the playbook, works (normally) longer with the offensive coaches, the game plan is made to his strengths, has more freedom in play-calling (audibles), is trusted with more agressive in game play-calling.
OTOH, there are real bad starters and real good starters. So the very best (like Marino, RG3) might win more than the aprox. 1 game than the replacement, while the real bad (like Russell) win less than their replacements.
When i looked at guys like Marino & Warner it was obvious they had great (positive) influence on their team wins. OTOH, there was no visible difference in game outcomes by the likes of Montana, Young, Grbac and to some extend even Brady, Rodgers or you name it.
My conclusion is (which might be not 100% effiecient) that only extremly talented guys like RG3 make a difference.
So i think WAS season is destroyed by one cheap shot.

 

[Amsterhammer]

So i think WAS season is destroyed by one cheap shot.

I sincerely hope that you are wrong. and will continue to believe in 'the miracle of Cleveland' till the fat lady has sung.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Anyway, it means for example instead of going 9-7 with a replacement, the same team would go 10-6 with the true starting QB.

I think this is too broad of a comment. Take a look at how Indy played without Manning last year for example.

You mention Warner, and I agree he was great, but the truth is when St. Louis had the "greatest show on turf", before him Green had been playing well, and Bulger, even Jamie Martin filled in okay.

A lot comes into play here.

I'm off to a sports bar with friends family. It will be a heavy Giants fanbase, and I'll be cheering for the Falcons. Wish me luck. Especially as I think the Giants could win by double digits.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

That´s true. At SL the contrast wasn´t stark with Warner in or not. But his real value was seen in New York and Arizona. There he was magic compared to his replacements. That´s the time i started to believe. That´s the reason i think he belongs to the HOF.

ATL up 17-0... Great

 

[Tom T.]

It´s my two cents, so you don´t have to like it.
BTW, i talked about QB´s, not team performance... just that little hint for you; Cassel put up the same stats as Brady in NE, he goes to another team and there you see...! Same with the Young´s, DeBerg´s, Detmer´s or whoever in this world.

No i didn´t know much about QB-Play. But now i know: If a team wins, the QB is great, if a team loses, he´s bad. Thanks for the enlightenment.

Next time around, just base your critic on facts, but don´t criticise for the sake of criticising. ESPN is there for you. We rather discuss here...

Blah, blah, blah. I did base my post on facts. Ask anyone with any inkling of knowledge about football and they will have Manning, Brady and Montana in their "best of" lists. To say Brady is a "system" qb is the most asinine thing I've ever read, and indicative of someone who has never actually watched him play. Same for Manning. Do you even have any idea of what those two do? They are like having a second head coach with the experience of a Belichick standing behind center. They manage the game like no others, and oh yeah, they are incredibly accurate with the ball. In a second, they look at what the defense is offering and instantly change the play to attack the weakness that is presented them. Sorry to call you out but you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Blah, blah, blah. I did base my post on facts. Ask anyone with any inkling of knowledge about football and they will have Manning, Brady and Montana in their "best of" lists. To say Brady is a "system" qb is the most asinine thing I've ever read, and indicative of someone who has never actually watched him play. Same for Manning. Do you even have any idea of what those two do? They are like having a second head coach with the experience of a Belichick standing behind center. They manage the game like no others, and oh yeah, they are incredibly accurate with the ball. In a second, they look at what the defense is offering and instantly change the play to attack the weakness that is presented them. Sorry to call you out but you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Blablabla... I know nothing. Tschüss... Go to your ESPN believers and get a erection by discussing how great your greats are.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I think this is too broad of a comment. Take a look at how Indy played without Manning last year for example.

Since i can´t link the QB-Study from PFP 2003 (it´s written in a book), i looked for another study. Here is the link from the guys of pro-football-reference:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=581
They have the same conclusion: approx. 1 win above the replacements.
Last year i put up my numbers (at least i think) of playoff performances of the teams who reached the SB, by starters and replacements.
AFIR the Record for Starters were around .770 Wng.-Pct., the replacements had something around .740. That is almost no difference.
As the old saying goes "QB´s get too much credit when winning, and too much blame when losing".

OTOH, as i said, i think extremely talented guys like Warner, Marino and RG3 for example might be worth more than 1 win above the replacements...

@Amsterhammer... it´s tight 3 point behind CLE. Let´s hope for a WAS win, since the NYG get blown out. It could be a fantastic ending.

 

[Amsterhammer]

I'm off to a sports bar with friends family. It will be a heavy Giants fanbase, and I'll be cheering for the Falcons. Wish me luck. Especially as I think the Giants could win by double digits.

By God, you must have had fun!

Kirk Cousins

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

By God, you must have had fun!

Kirk Cousins

LMAO.
Hope Alpe will tell us soon...

Great win for WAS, you see QB´s are overrated, even "our" RG3.
Good call by Merckx.

Here come the Redskins, going to the playoffs (thank you Eli & NYG) with a healthy RG3. That will be fun.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

By God, you must have had fun!

I'm back, and sober. Who needs beer when you witness something so entertaining?! A total schelacking. I thought the Falcons would be unable to move the ball and we'd see a 20-10 type Giants win. I was dead wrong. Falcons looked for real, Giants looked done.

Kirk Cousins

Told ya so on that one. He fell way too far in the draft, and the Skins are playing very well overall as a team. I see them winning out and taking the division, no matter who is at QB (though RGIII is better than Cousins.)

Broncos big win. Key win for GB in Chicago. More comments later.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Giants looked done.

That´s the problem. They look done. Remember that one?
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200711250nyg.htm
... and went on to win the SB.

...or this one
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201111280nor.htm
... and went on to win the SB.

... or this one
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/199012150nyg.htm
... and went on to win the SB.

... and finally this one
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nyg/1934.htm

Anyway, as said some months ago, the most lucky pro sports team in the universe should regress to the mean and don´t win another SB in the next 100 years. They have consumed all luck the football gods offered them for the time of their existence. So i should be optimistic...

-----------------------

ROFL: A comment at NFL.com
"Norv Turner could not coach a Fish to Swim". If this wasn´t a cycling site, i´d use that as my signature.