HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Buffalo Sabres
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

OT: Bills IV - Preseason Perspective: 2008 Lions went 4-0

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-08-2012, 02:04 PM
  #326
Myllz
ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 13,571
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vcv View Post
Because of Fitz or other reasons?

Plenty of teams make the playoffs with average QBs.
Combination of both. The defense should be improved, but it's still unproven and might take time to work together. I also don't think the offense is good enough as a whole.

Myllz is online now  
Old
08-08-2012, 02:28 PM
  #327
vcv
Moderator
Deal with it
 
vcv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Williamsville, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 13,565
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to vcv
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
Fair enough.

If Buffalo is content to get the the playoffs, sweet.

Alex Smith looked great last season. In the NFC championship game last season, both the 49er and Giant defenses were great. The 49ers even had the better running game (Giants were actually one of the worst running teams last year).

The difference was Eli Manning.

When the goal is winning a Super Bowl, then you need an elite QB. I'd love for Fitzpatrick to be that guy. I'm far from convinced.
I 100% agree that Fitz won't get us to, and win, a Super Bowl.

But as a fan, yes I am content with just getting to the playoffs this year.

If that happens, and after not making it far enough for a year or two, then you identity Fitz as the weak link. By then you either drafted another QB you like or are prepared to move up for one.

vcv is online now  
Old
08-08-2012, 02:29 PM
  #328
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal System Ehrhoff View Post
The issue I have with your rating style is that it measures nebulous qualities. By all accounts, for example, Fitzpatrick hits on 3 of your top 4 in spades throughout his college career while Stafford is a murkier sort. Cam Newton wasn't exactly a king of mechanics at Auburn and he's setting the world on fire. I find it interesting that you praise Matt Ryan of all people in your comparisons seeing as by most advanced metrics he's been an average Q touted as a gamebreaker.
How would Brady, Eli and Peyton Manning, Brees, Rivers, Rodgers, etc. all fit in?

When you grade QB potential and ceiling, you have to rate nebulous qualities. I look at college QBs in light of what I can determine of their nebulous qualities. All of those QBs, with the exception of Brady, could be seen as very strong in almost every single quality that I listed. You get a couple here and there that don't fit, like Rodgers' poor mechanics, but for the most part, all of the QBs I listed were strong in my categories.

Draftniks tell us that guys like Stafford and Newton were great picks out of college. I say they were extreme gambles that are paying off. For every one of them, you get a JaMarcus Russell or a David Carr.

The only first round QBs that I've ever looked at that have finished high as I've rated them, and ended up being busts, were Joey Harrington and Brady Quinn.

It's not science. QBs are almost never about measurables. I sometimes look at football outsiders as a source of advanced stats, but quarterbacking isn't hockey. Eli Manning plays in a vertical, sight adjustment offense for Kevin Gilbride that incorporates elements he used in Houston's run'n'shoot offense. Receivers have to read the defense as they are running, and they make mistakes. So you can grade Manning by stats, citing his interception and being way behind a guy like Rodgers. But Manning is making throws where the completion is 50% determined by the receiver making the same in-stride read. So, you can throw the stats out the window when comparing Rodgers and Manning. They play in two completely different offenses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal System Ehrhoff View Post
Rivers had the inside track on the starting job in 2004 until he held out on the team through the preseason, so that's not necessarily comparable. Beyond that, Norv Turner's really the reason that team never did anything, not the age of the roster. In 2007 practically every star had a torn A/MCL and they still came within striking distance of the ~special~ Patriots team.
Here's the comparison: the Chargers built the team, then acquired Rivers. His window of opportunity was a lot shorter than, say, Eli or Peyton Manning, who were both drafted/acquired when the team wasn't that good. If you draft a QB first, then build the team, the team is ready about the same time the QB is, and adds years of contention.

Watch as the Jets disintegrate over the next couple seasons. They'll be left with Sanchez at his prime (whatever that is) and not much else.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 02:42 PM
  #329
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,478
vCash: 500
We have improved the D line. How we do in the secondary, and how our LBs perform/depth holds up, is obviously TBD.

jBuds is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 02:47 PM
  #330
Connor McDavid
Generational Poster
 
Connor McDavid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 11,834
vCash: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
How would Brady, Eli and Peyton Manning, Brees, Rivers, Rodgers, etc. all fit in?
With the Russell/DivisionChampionAlexSmith/Bradford/Losman class counterbalancing.

Quote:
Draftniks tell us that guys like Stafford and Newton were great picks out of college. I say they were extreme gambles that are paying off. For every one of them, you get a JaMarcus Russell or a David Carr.
That's of course fair, but you could really say that about any style of quarterback.

Quote:
The only first round QBs that I've ever looked at that have finished high as I've rated them, and ended up being busts, were Joey Harrington and Brady Quinn.
How do you define bust, exactly? Would you consider a journeyman starter a success if he was drafted top 10?




Quote:
Here's the comparison: the Chargers built the team, then acquired Rivers. His window of opportunity was a lot shorter than, say, Eli or Peyton Manning, who were both drafted/acquired when the team wasn't that good. If you draft a QB first, then build the team, the team is ready about the same time the QB is, and adds years of contention.
You could say this about literally any QB drafted by an established team, though. That team wasn't designed around waiting for an elite QB to drive them to greatness. It was very much originally intended for Brees' success.

Quote:
Watch as the Jets disintegrate over the next couple seasons. They'll be left with Sanchez at his prime (whatever that is) and not much else.
I'd be surprised if they make the playoffs this year alone.

Connor McDavid is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 02:58 PM
  #331
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,089
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Fatal System Ehrhoff;53387685] With the Russell/DivisionChampionAlexSmith/Bradford/Losman class counterbalancing. That doesn't make any sense. Russell would be evaluated low in almost every category. So would Losman. Alex Smith would rate high in some, but not in others. His college offense was the same as Tebow's.

How does Bradford fit in your logic? He's not considered a bust at all, yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal System Ehrhoff View Post
How do you define bust, exactly? Would you consider a journeyman starter a success if he was drafted top 10?
Any quarterback that does not meet the expected results upon draft day.

The Raiders thought Russell was a franchise QB. Bust.

The Bills thought JP Losman was the future of the franchise. Bust.

The Packers though Flynn could be a good backup. Exceeded expectations.

The Colts thought Manning would be the franchise QB they needed. Met expectations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal System Ehrhoff View Post
You could say this about literally any QB drafted by an established team, though. That team wasn't designed around waiting for an elite QB to drive them to greatness. It was very much originally intended for Brees' success.
But that doesn't happen often because most quarterbacks tagged as potential franchise QBs don't last long. So it's most often a rebuilding team that takes a rookie QB.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 03:10 PM
  #332
Connor McDavid
Generational Poster
 
Connor McDavid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 11,834
vCash: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
How does Bradford fit in your logic? He's not considered a bust at all, yet.
He's a bottom tier QB now, how long does he get?

Quote:
Any quarterback that does not meet the expected results upon draft day.

The Raiders thought Russell was a franchise QB. Bust.

The Bills thought JP Losman was the future of the franchise. Bust.

The Packers though Flynn could be a good backup. Exceeded expectations.

The Colts thought Manning would be the franchise QB they needed. Met expectations.
I can't agree with expectations determining whether or not a QB is a bust. Any QB drafted in the first is expected to be a franchise's answer, a high-end starter. Sometimes even the second. Does that mean players like Flacco and Freeman, who are quality but not exceptional starters, are busts?


Quote:
But that doesn't happen often because most quarterbacks tagged as potential franchise QBs don't last long. So it's most often a rebuilding team that takes a rookie QB.
Unless Team X expects player Y to be a franchise QB like Cincy-Dalton

Connor McDavid is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 03:14 PM
  #333
whiplash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 5,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post

The Packers though Flynn could be a good backup. Exceeded expectations.
All these arguments aside, I still don't get the Matt Flynn spoogefest (not talking about you, just in general). The guy has started what, 2 games in his entire life?

whiplash is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 03:15 PM
  #334
Connor McDavid
Generational Poster
 
Connor McDavid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 11,834
vCash: 436
Trent Richardson is gonna retire before he plays a game

Connor McDavid is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 03:28 PM
  #335
SundherDome
Jhonas is an Ewok
 
SundherDome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minneapolis,MN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
Since Nix took over, Buffalo has passed on Tebow, Locker, Ponder, Gabbert, and Tannehill (assuming a tradeup to 7 last draft). Chances are two of those QBs are going to pan out and have a great opportunity to be a franchise QB.
Tebow-glad they passed, will out of the league in a 2-3 years.
Locker- So far the most promising...but well see
Ponder-He will do well but wont lead the vikings to the promise land
Gabbert- God he is afraid to get hit and rushes his throws
Tannehill- ??? Shouldn't of gone in the first round. Good backup ala Cassel.

These last few years for drafting qb's has been poor at best (outside of this year Luck & RGIII) im very glad we have stayed away and next years qb class is deep as hell, think 2004 ( Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Schaub.) You have 4 great qb's. Compare to this year ( Barkley, Bray, Wilson, Jones, and Smith) all have the potential to be super bowl winners. You draft a qb this year.

SundherDome is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 03:31 PM
  #336
Myllz
ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF
 
Myllz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle
Country: United States
Posts: 13,571
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanekTheMvp View Post
Tebow-glad they passed, will out of the league in a 2-3 years.
Locker- So far the most promising...but well see
Ponder-He will do well but wont lead the vikings to the promise land
Gabbert- God he is afraid to get hit and rushes his throws
Tannehill- ??? Shouldn't of gone in the first round. Good backup ala Cassel.

These last few years for drafting qb's has been poor at best (outside of this year Luck & RGIII) im very glad we have stayed away and next years qb class is deep as hell, think 2004 ( Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Schaub.) You have 4 great qb's. Compare to this year ( Barkley, Bray, Wilson, Jones, and Smith) all have the potential to be super bowl winners. You draft a qb this year.
I like how you left out Losman.

Myllz is online now  
Old
08-08-2012, 03:50 PM
  #337
SFTC Addict
Not Here To Be Liked
 
SFTC Addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 10,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
Why?

What if they did take Locker or Tannehill? Locker didn't play last year, might not play this year, and Tannehill isn't likely to start. They could've had their QB of the present and the future on the roster.

Then, so what if Fitzpatrick becomes great? They make a Kevin Kolb move with the younger QB.

Right now Buffalo has a playoff roster with a QB that has never proven his ability over the course of a season, and no one on the roster that can play the position now much less the future.

At the most important position on the field, Buffalo has a decent starter that has shown glimpses of greatness, Thigpen and Young. Meh.
One would argue before last season Alex Smith was below average. He had a good season but lets see if he can actually repeat it.

SFTC Addict is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 03:52 PM
  #338
SFTC Addict
Not Here To Be Liked
 
SFTC Addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 10,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiplash View Post
All these arguments aside, I still don't get the Matt Flynn spoogefest (not talking about you, just in general). The guy has started what, 2 games in his entire life?
With a solid offense to boot.

SFTC Addict is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 04:32 PM
  #339
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal System Ehrhoff View Post
He's a bottom tier QB now, how long does he get?
People judge NFL quarterbacks WAY too soon. Go back and look at how terrible some of the QB's in the 1970s were. Fouts was terrible until his sixth season. Bradshaw won his first Super Bowl with terrible stats. If we judged past QBs by their stats, some HOF QBs that would never make it. And the NFL is infinitely more complex today, yet we expect results sooner. Tragic mistake.

Bradford's only going into his third season. He was promising his first year. Last year he was hurt and played ten games. He plays on one of the worst teams in the league, in multiple systems. I won't grade him for another two seasons. He finally has a good head coach and stability around him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal System Ehrhoff View Post
I can't agree with expectations determining whether or not a QB is a bust. Any QB drafted in the first is expected to be a franchise's answer, a high-end starter. Sometimes even the second. Does that mean players like Flacco and Freeman, who are quality but not exceptional starters, are busts?
Why? Because it's not a universal standard? Some teams will take players and grade them on expectations. Torell Troup is a perfect example. Nix selected him as the backup NT and eventual starter in mind. If Troup makes the Bills second team, he's met expectations - Buffalo's.

You're grading Flacco and Freeman too soon. Freeman is going into his third year, and played on a terrible team that fell apart last season.

Flacco has only played four seasons. And he led his team to the AFC championship last season, and played well in that game, proving he can handle the pressure and disproving a lot of doubters. The would be winning drive could've been a career statement. If Lee Evans hangs on, you're comment holds no water- Flacco takes his team to the Super Bowl, and probably is then seen as an elite QB. Based on one play- Lee Evans' play. That's how flakey and non-precise "elite" is. If Lee Evans catches a pass, the Ravens go to the Super Bowl, and Flacco is elite.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 04:42 PM
  #340
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanekTheMvp View Post
Tebow-glad they passed, will out of the league in a 2-3 years.
Locker- So far the most promising...but well see
Ponder-He will do well but wont lead the vikings to the promise land
Gabbert- God he is afraid to get hit and rushes his throws
Tannehill- ??? Shouldn't of gone in the first round. Good backup ala Cassel.
How can you tell? Ponder is a horizontal timing QB that throws in a dome. That's ideal for him.

You're judging Gabbert based on one season on a terrible, terrible team, where the coach may not have wanted to draft the QB? That's way too soon of a judgment.

Had Miami not taken Tannehill, Buffalo or Seattle would have. Seattle for sure, based on Pete Carroll's comments. There's absolutely no basis for your comparison to Cassel. Tannehill was a first round, top 10, QB prior the 2011 college season even began. Fans never heard of him, though.

Players don't "rise" or "fall" like the media makes it out. NFL teams finish their draft grades around January, right after bowl season ends. They adjust some based on the Senior Bowl and other all-star games. The combine and pro days are just confirmation of views the team already has.

As the media talks to the teams during the off-season, the media gets word that someone they had no regard for, like Tannehill, is actually rated way higher than they thought. Rather than admit they got one wrong, mysteriously, the player's stock "rises."

That's why guys like Nix say things like "I've never seen a player's stock rise without playing a game." Tannehill's stock was always top ten, the media and the fans just didn't know it until about April. Creates great pre-draft drama and ratings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VanekTheMvp View Post
These last few years for drafting qb's has been poor at best (outside of this year Luck & RGIII) im very glad we have stayed away and next years qb class is deep as hell, think 2004 ( Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Schaub.) You have 4 great qb's. Compare to this year ( Barkley, Bray, Wilson, Jones, and Smith) all have the potential to be super bowl winners. You draft a qb this year.
You're missing the best of the group: Logan Thomas.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 04:51 PM
  #341
rkorchinski
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
How can you tell? Ponder is a horizontal timing QB that throws in a dome. That's ideal for him.

You're judging Gabbert based on one season on a terrible, terrible team, where the coach may not have wanted to draft the QB? That's way too soon of a judgment.

Had Miami not taken Tannehill, Buffalo or Seattle would have. Seattle for sure, based on Pete Carroll's comments. There's absolutely no basis for your comparison to Cassel. Tannehill was a first round, top 10, QB prior the 2011 college season even began. Fans never heard of him, though.

Players don't "rise" or "fall" like the media makes it out. NFL teams finish their draft grades around January, right after bowl season ends. They adjust some based on the Senior Bowl and other all-star games. The combine and pro days are just confirmation of views the team already has.

As the media talks to the teams during the off-season, the media gets word that someone they had no regard for, like Tannehill, is actually rated way higher than they thought. Rather than admit they got one wrong, mysteriously, the player's stock "rises."

That's why guys like Nix say things like "I've never seen a player's stock rise without playing a game." Tannehill's stock was always top ten, the media and the fans just didn't know it until about April. Creates great pre-draft drama and ratings.



You're missing the best of the group: Logan Thomas.
Agree on Thomas. Don't rule out Mike Glennon from NC State 6'6'' 233 lbs. Should play his way into the first round this year.

Overall GREAT year for QB's. Could be a special class.

rkorchinski is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 05:01 PM
  #342
Der Jaeger
Registered User
 
Der Jaeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkorchinski View Post
Agree on Thomas. Don't rule out Mike Glennon from NC State 6'6'' 233 lbs. Should play his way into the first round this year.

Overall GREAT year for QB's. Could be a special class.

Shhhh. He's a secret. I live in ACC land and got to see him play a ton.

Not sold on Landry Jones. I don't think I'd take him.

Bills fans should pray Tyler Bray falls to them.

I think Wilson ends up being the guy pushed down to Buffalo.

I rate them, currently: Thomas, Bray, Barkley, Wilson, Glennon, Jones, Smith.

Der Jaeger is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 05:34 PM
  #343
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
Shhhh. He's a secret. I live in ACC land and got to see him play a ton.

Not sold on Landry Jones. I don't think I'd take him.

Bills fans should pray Tyler Bray falls to them.

I think Wilson ends up being the guy pushed down to Buffalo.

I rate them, currently: Thomas, Bray, Barkley, Wilson, Glennon, Jones, Smith.
Gimme more on Thomas please. I don't see VT much

jBuds is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 05:37 PM
  #344
Connor McDavid
Generational Poster
 
Connor McDavid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Ras al-Khaimah
Posts: 11,834
vCash: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
People judge NFL quarterbacks WAY too soon. Go back and look at how terrible some of the QB's in the 1970s were. Fouts was terrible until his sixth season. Bradshaw won his first Super Bowl with terrible stats. If we judged past QBs by their stats, some HOF QBs that would never make it. And the NFL is infinitely more complex today, yet we expect results sooner. Tragic mistake.
Don't be dramatic. Given the average career length of an NFL starter (let's be generous and say 10 years starting for decent to great Qs), if he can't hack it for 30% of his career a franchise shouldn't play by the sunk cost fallacy. Trent Dilfer won a SB with terrible stats too. Because he was terrible. And Baltimore saw that and moved on. It's not the same league it once was, true, but that's a whole different argument altogether. Modern QBs are on the whole better than their forefathers due to the increased emphasis from their early days on the pass attack.

Quote:
Bradford's only going into his third season. He was promising his first year. Last year he was hurt and played ten games. He plays on one of the worst teams in the league, in multiple systems. I won't grade him for another two seasons. He finally has a good head coach and stability around him.
In the sense that his first year was promising in that it was an average year by a young player, sure. But it wasn't all that great. He then regressed heavily. But fine, we'll hold off until he has 4 average to poor years.


Quote:
Why? Because it's not a universal standard? Some teams will take players and grade them on expectations. Torell Troup is a perfect example. Nix selected him as the backup NT and eventual starter in mind. If Troup makes the Bills second team, he's met expectations - Buffalo's.
Because by all accounts it's entirely irrational. If The Dolphins expect Tannehill to be better than Manning and he only becomes a top-10 QB, he's a bust? Please.

Quote:
You're grading Flacco and Freeman too soon. Freeman is going into his third year, and played on a terrible team that fell apart last season.
Again, it's really not too soon to start analyzing.

Quote:
Flacco has only played four seasons. And he led his team to the AFC championship last season, and played well in that game, proving he can handle the pressure and disproving a lot of doubters.
Also known as Mark Sanchez's first two years. Sanchez>Flacco?

Quote:
The would be winning drive could've been a career statement. If Lee Evans hangs on, you're comment holds no water- Flacco takes his team to the Super Bowl, and probably is then seen as an elite QB. Based on one play- Lee Evans' play. That's how flakey and non-precise "elite" is. If Lee Evans catches a pass, the Ravens go to the Super Bowl, and Flacco is elite.
In what world can you evaluate an individual based on team success?

Connor McDavid is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 06:07 PM
  #345
whiplash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 5,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
People judge NFL quarterbacks WAY too soon. Go back and look at how terrible some of the QB's in the 1970s were. Fouts was terrible until his sixth season. Bradshaw won his first Super Bowl with terrible stats. If we judged past QBs by their stats, some HOF QBs that would never make it. And the NFL is infinitely more complex today, yet we expect results sooner. Tragic mistake.

Bradford's only going into his third season. He was promising his first year. Last year he was hurt and played ten games. He plays on one of the worst teams in the league, in multiple systems. I won't grade him for another two seasons. He finally has a good head coach and stability around him.



Why? Because it's not a universal standard? Some teams will take players and grade them on expectations. Torell Troup is a perfect example. Nix selected him as the backup NT and eventual starter in mind. If Troup makes the Bills second team, he's met expectations - Buffalo's.

You're grading Flacco and Freeman too soon. Freeman is going into his third year, and played on a terrible team that fell apart last season.

Flacco has only played four seasons. And he led his team to the AFC championship last season, and played well in that game, proving he can handle the pressure and disproving a lot of doubters. The would be winning drive could've been a career statement. If Lee Evans hangs on, you're comment holds no water- Flacco takes his team to the Super Bowl, and probably is then seen as an elite QB. Based on one play- Lee Evans' play. That's how flakey and non-precise "elite" is. If Lee Evans catches a pass, the Ravens go to the Super Bowl, and Flacco is elite.
I agree with most of what you said, except the bolded.

He's never had a QB rating higher than 94 and if you don't like that stat: he's never tossed more than 25 TDs (though he keeps his interceptions down it's still a 2:1 ratio with TDs), he can't run and he's been sacked at least 31 times each season and he's never even sniffed 4,000 yards. He can say what he wants about himself but he is not an elite QB. He's a good game manager who, yes, was one drop away from making the SB but even if Lee makes that catch, I wouldn't consider Flacco elite by any stretch

whiplash is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 06:56 PM
  #346
SFTC Addict
Not Here To Be Liked
 
SFTC Addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 10,669
vCash: 500
What has Flacco ever done??? Fitz could probably have made the SB by now if he played infront of that D. Yes, hes better than joe. Joe is not flashy. Though I would take Freddy over Ray Rice anyday.

SFTC Addict is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 07:01 PM
  #347
SFTC Addict
Not Here To Be Liked
 
SFTC Addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 10,669
vCash: 500
Lol. Chuck E. Cheese Schumer standing outside of Ralph Wilson Stadium today crabbing about loans!

SFTC Addict is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 07:53 PM
  #348
whiplash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 5,584
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Jaeger View Post
People judge NFL quarterbacks WAY too soon. Go back and look at how terrible some of the QB's in the 1970s were. Fouts was terrible until his sixth season. Bradshaw won his first Super Bowl with terrible stats. If we judged past QBs by their stats, some HOF QBs that would never make it. And the NFL is infinitely more complex today, yet we expect results sooner. Tragic mistake.
So why no patience for Fitzpatrick, since he's only started, cumulatively, about 3.5 seasons?

I'm just busting balls.


Hoping I can get out early tomorrow and find a stream of the first half at least. Dying for some football

whiplash is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 07:59 PM
  #349
La Cosa Nostra
The Future
 
La Cosa Nostra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,871
vCash: 500
Wow people need to stop hating on Flacco. Last 3 years thrown for 3600+ yards and 20+ TDs each season. He actually reminds me of a Brady lite.Remember Brady didn't eclipse 4000 yards until his 6th season.Comparing the twos first 4 seasons, Brady threw only 103 more yards then Flacco has.And Baltimore actually has a running game so they don't even rely on Flacco to thrown a lot.

And best believe Flacco would be our best QB since Kelly. Yes way better then Flutie.

La Cosa Nostra is offline  
Old
08-08-2012, 09:05 PM
  #350
Dubi Doo
Registered User
 
Dubi Doo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,773
vCash: 500
I can't wait for the home opener!

Dubi Doo is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:12 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.