Owner
Posted 18 July 2013 - 05:17 PM
Do players who play in domes get demerits for playing in such? In addition to Ryan, there's Peyton (just about all his career) and Drew Brees. Like I said I think Ryan could adjust pretty well based on what he did at BC.
Demerits from who? To me it is just a logical part of the entire evaluation. You evaluate the conditions, the scheme, the teammates, the opposition... the physical talent, the decision making, the footwork, etc. etc.
Banned
Posted 18 July 2013 - 05:20 PM
Ryan has to prove he can perform in cold weather games. Late December Jan cold weather games. If its really cold or a lot of wind forget about it.
Dude blew his chance last year not getting to the SB with homefield. Obviously it's possible, but Id never bet on him going into NYG, GB, Chi, etc and playing well in the playoffs.
If you want to credit Ryan for his reg season record and stats as the basis for having him as a top 5 QB overall that is fine, but I'll tell you right now I'm taking at least 7 QBs over him as a playoff QB. Brady, Manning, Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Flacco, Roethlisberger. All of them have clearly proven to be better already. That's not even including the guys who haven't proven it but I'd also not be afraid to take over him in a playoff game like Luck and Wilson.
la cerveza está muy fría
Posted 18 July 2013 - 05:32 PM
@fuzydunlop
HOF
Posted 18 July 2013 - 05:45 PM
Demerits from who? To me it is just a logical part of the entire evaluation. You evaluate the conditions, the scheme, the teammates, the opposition... the physical talent, the decision making, the footwork, etc. etc.
You, other evaluators? I'm guessing you'd hold warm weather QBs to a lower standard as well.
HOF
Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:04 PM
You, other evaluators? I'm guessing you'd hold warm weather QBs to a lower standard as well.
I don't think that's what he's saying. He's spot on here, it's a logical part of the entire evaluation. When you start to see road/home... warm weather/cold weather splits in a big way, then you have to include that as part of your evaluation. It's not the entire evaluation though, and that's not what he's saying. It's no "this guy plays in a dome, so he can't be as good, etc. Drew Brees for instance... no one brings that up.
HOF
Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:16 PM
I don't think that's what he's saying. He's spot on here, it's a logical part of the entire evaluation. When you start to see road/home... warm weather/cold weather splits in a big way, then you have to include that as part of your evaluation. It's not the entire evaluation though, and that's not what he's saying. It's no "this guy plays in a dome, so he can't be as good, etc. Drew Brees for instance... no one brings that up.
Fair point with the splits, I just don't think you can hold it against him that he plays in a dome. I do think the splits are better than the cast of characters that surround them. For one thing, I've always been to think that Tom Brady has benefitted from the NE system, they didn't drop off much from Cassel. But how fair is it for me to drop him severely if he's playing for Jacksonville, probably not much. Change the rules, change the game.
HOF
Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:22 PM
Fair point with the splits, I just don't think you can hold it against him that he plays in a dome. I do think the splits are better than the cast of characters that surround them. For one thing, I've always been to think that Tom Brady has benefitted from the NE system, they didn't drop off much from Cassel. But how fair is it for me to drop him severely if he's playing for Jacksonville, probably not much. Change the rules, change the game.
No, just saying this guy isn't as good 'cause he plays ________ is lazy analysis. But if it's backed up by some context, then there's a worthy discussion. Even still, given the sample size issues the NFL presents, there's still the whole debate of causation vs. correlation.
Moderator
Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:31 PM
HOF
Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:35 PM
Ryan < Flacco < Brady, Brees, Peyton, Rodgers
Put those four any way you like.
It's tough if I'm going career I'm going Peyton than Brady but if I'm going right now it's probably Rodgers then Brees. But yeah I agree it's pretty tricky those four.
Back by no demand
Posted 18 July 2013 - 07:45 PM
Ok want to know why Flacco wins from indoors......
BY LOCATION
CMP 99
ATT 158
YDS 1224
CMP% 62.6
AVG 8.10
LNG 74
TD 10
INT 1
SACK 12
RAT 103.6
Ok I did not add rushing yards. DO you see how much better Joe plays in domes compared to outdoors? Hands down Joe is better indoors like all QB's.
Edit this is from 2008-2012 stats and my graph did not translate to the webpage sorry its hard to read :/
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 07:46 AM
Would you guys consider this top group of quarterbacks to be elite? 
Moderator
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 10:28 AM
Would you guys consider this top group of quarterbacks to be elite?
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 10:28 AM
Flacco #4
Nice but in the end it is just another ranking. Jaws is certainly more knowledgable than most though. For a team QB starved like we were for som many years, it is great to have a QB like Joe Flacco.
Must be elite huh?
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 10:31 AM
When you have 32 of something, I think only the top two or three can be called the "elite". I think John Clayton said once that there are 10 elite QBs in the NFL. If a third of the league is elite, that's not elite.
To me the whole elite debate is silly. At the end of the day, the question should be can your QB elevate his team, come through in the clutch and consistently win games. Joe has done that. Elite???, who cares, he is a stone cold winner. That is enough for me.
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 10:41 AM
When you have 32 of something, I think only the top two or three can be called the "elite". I think John Clayton said once that there are 10 elite QBs in the NFL. If a third of the league is elite, that's not elite.
I'd say top 4-5 are usually elite, agree 10 is too many.
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 10:50 AM
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 05:16 PM
I'd probably have Flacco #5 behind Brees, Peyton, Brady, and Rodgers. I'll give Jaws the benefit of the doubt though considering he knows far more than me about QB play 
I would say I think Romo and Schaub should be switched. I think Schaub is a glorified game manager at this point of his career. He had a couple of years where he put up big numbers (and never won anything), but recently he has been awfully mediocre, especially in big games or when playing from behind.
My top 10:
1. Rodgers
2. Peyton
3. Brady
4. Brees
5. Flacco
6. Roethlisberger
7. Ryan
8. Eli
9. Romo
10-13. Wilson, Luck. Kaepernick, Griffin in some order. I think Luck has the most upside.
HOF
Posted 19 July 2013 - 05:21 PM
Banned
Posted 19 July 2013 - 10:44 PM
I put Ben 5, Eli 6, Flacco 7 and Ryan 8... the rest is fine, though I like RG3's upside more than Luck's (I realize that isn't a popular opinion).
RG3 will get exposed somewhat this year IMO. Even, if defenses don't catch up to the pistol/read option I think Shanahan is going to be leery of overusing RG3 in a lot of those sets because of the injury. They're going to try and make him more of a pocket passer and I think he'll struggle with that. People point to his effectiveness passing and in the pocket last year but it was because he had wide open WRs. He wasn't great at making the classic pocket passer tight window, precise throws.
Luck is a pocket passer who has good mobility unlike the other young QBs who found success last year. Always, always, always take the guy with the best pocket skills. It only helps that Luck has mobility too.
In conclusion, yes going with RG3 over Luck isn't a smart decision. The thing is I'm not so sure it is such an unpopular opinion overall. My feeling is its pretty close to 50/50 overall.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
